L c C - 



exec c jQc^tss^uk^v 
"^Ccc-c ~'cc<fc'cccc < 

ScO-C CC<^CCCC ' 

^Scc c c c c<c cede 



c 





J * ^-^_ 


j e 


r t 


h < ««c 


_ <3 


C 


.. < «c«r 


C 


C 


c cc 


O 


c 


c «c< 


c 


c 


c c<c 


c 


c 


c cc 


<t 




<r cc 


c < 




ccr< 


: <i 


,:C 


OXC 


: <a 


^ 


C^rc 


oc 


■L- ' "■■ 


cc cc < 


Cc~ « 




ccccc 


s & 




^ccc< 


.Oi ^ 



^C<jc>*c<_c c c :'s<C'cc ^ i 

L <«k«ccc c. ;<c cc ccicj c : 

X C<C<SOS-C CS fCCCiCCCC c 
"c." C<3C03C< <2 C < <v ^C<X v 

"Tc <r<:<r<:<^ «r e<rc< <.- 

>c<^:occ<<c<ac dd CT 

2; ccmcc c s- Ccc ,<t<j: c cc <:<-*M 
X <<csmc <cr< cm d c c cc . 

S \«JL^C. d C Cc< <T C c ^C < C 

^0<<gclc"~dc~< Cc cC dec cc 
^'«^:.Ci C Cc CTjCLc cc cc" 

l^c < d -Cdc-cd <t<C <c 
I:" C tCd/C dc C <SmdCZ< CC <©C « 

^lc .cdccd c <c ex; 

~C; c coc c '.cCd <C 

_JC r <T^C < d<d c cOCjCC ' 

;7dd dXKC ,<e <d ^cd«t^ 

:<d < 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS.^ 



-CXCZcc dec* 
«:<CXcc^<^ 



| FORCE COLLECTION.] ^ 

# # 

|| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. J 



c c 

JC dec <3i 






ccc:: 

■cc cc 
^C<C 

cccr 



r ^grcc^rcc <fd<r 






"LTc^f CC:<3C€Sr««: 



c c c 

C r- ^ 



<:«*<: cc ccc 



fc c cc c 
T c<c Cc < 



< f "^C <. <: < c ^£l^ C < 



;;vccccc cc 
c c CCC cfC C€ 

I re cc c cc c 
ctcc ccc ec <:< c 
«ticc ^CCcc Cc -c 

C C c<lCC ccccc 

^fcrc ctrcc crc< c 



,c<C cc , 

— SS Ccc 

= ccccc « 

,.^car 



-ccc dc ^CCCCdC c cd" ccccc, ^ cc c 



r CC«C CO 



•CCXiO 

2 -co c< 



^cccmcC^cx 

tLCCCjKrOjC Cc 

rcc<3e-<3r.c< 



«S« 



ccc 

c< c 

c 



cc ccc 

Cc /o< 

CCe cccc <1 
< cc c c.<rc; 

:cc ece~ 

ex cccc 

Cc r<*«rr. 



Ccirc 



1 <*C^LC 

:«3:c < 



Cs C 



CZ 

:cc 



c«: ■<* «jlccjcc eje <l 

c ccc «c?:oc<rcc r 

C <<CCI ^X^f<^^ 

C <^<£^'$^^« 

C c- c^c^cc<cc 

«C CCjCc CC 

r:cLC5tc< 

^c:ciCrc< 

CI «T <T <jCCC« 

C'.C «T:C< 

c cccc <:c: <7 «K<<cr 

:"■ cccc~ cCCT <7 «3fcc 

c«c cccc 5pcr : '- 
cc-rc -OCT <:c «^cx 

c o: c cc cic «a£c<rc 
c ecc c<r <rsr «acc 



<GX<3 



ICcC c< 
~C CCC< 



cX cc c_cc 

CCCCCC 



cc<E^<_cxc:ci: 



re c €c 



l <L <C C Ct c< 
-^C.CC C C '•<«_ 

c<3c «£<e c -or <secctrc c <o 

^CICL/CIX cccc«c^cic<zc;^ 

c^: ^ <ca <r<c c*oc<cfc c<c^ 

jC ©©M«EC cr c 



<C c<cccc 
«c c<r:ccc 

<T c<cccr 

C cTCC^cr :> 

c<c<Grc 
90s:- 

.CaCCC 



rccc 



cccccrc. 

- CC Ccccvc 

LCCCOCO 

' CCX CcCC^CCCC << 

c c cc- . c «r <r ^miirlte *cc c 



C,CCCv. 

XcCC 

3CCC 

3 ccc 

XCC( 

recce 

C CC'< 

ccc C 



"C CCC (CC<jKI 



.■ccc? 

C<cl<^c 
ccror 

atrr 



JC <fp*p 

%3te<f- «Ict< 
t:c€icc< 

_cC OCL<L 

1_.<C OC "CC 

Iaccc 
X- ^c:<se 
x-cexe 

"X cccc «c 

c CCCC 



Z£f<^C( 



< <c,c cl cc • «kcc<cx<c- «rsc c^^ ^^^^=^- > 



<k< 



cccccoc 

ccpccc 



K^S *&«»£»£& 



- c:<cc 
> c c< 

: : c<c 
c ccc 
f ccc 
:c c <fc< 

<- < <- 
^c<:c 

r CcC 

C re 



$ p®cc c c 



^^C ^C C<c >^ 






Obo/ni^. aiLows.' 



A 



VINDICATION 



OF THE 



PROCEEDINGS 



OF THE 



JFI71ST CHURCH AND PARISH 



IN 



V/' 

HINGHAM, 



IN SETTLING THE 



i?EF. JOSEPH RICHARDSON, A. M, 



AS THEIR. 



GOSPEL MINISTER 



►03«^»9a^^»39-?-^^J:^a^!i<^^33»<©*3»fflBBB 



" FAME, THE GREAT ILL, FROM SMALL BEGINNINGS GROWS, 

<; AND SPREADS THROUGH TREMBLING CROWDS DISASTROUS NEWS. 

<{ WITH COURT INFORMERS, HAUNTS AND ROYAL SPIES, 

*' THINGS DONE RELATES, NOT DONE SUE FEIGNS J 'AND MINGLES T R U T H 

" WITH LIES. 
" TALK IS HER BUSINESS AND HER CHIEF DELIGHT." 



PRINTED BY B. PARKS, NO. 7-5, STATE STREET, BOSTON*... 1807 



*+A 






APOLOGY 



ALREADY too long have the people of the first 
Parish, in Hingham, it is believed, suffered from numer- 
ous ??iisrepresentations which are gone abroad, against 
their own conduct and the character of the man whom they 
have settled as their Minister. / 

As they feel themselves to be justified in their conduct *> 
they arc desirous of appearing justified in the eyes of the 
world. 

They wish neither to practise arts, nor to invent argu- 
ments to deceive the world, but only to lay before the pub- 
lic plain facts, that the candid may judge righteously. 

The reader is requested to pay particular attention to 
the notes in the margin, which will explain or throzv light 
upon the subject before him. 

Further apology to the public must be useless ; facts 
are stubborn things, and they are respectfully submitted 
in the following vindication. 

We feel that some apology is due to those Gentlemen 
whose letters or certificates we have taken the liberty to 
publish without their particular consent. But we are 
persuaded they will take ?w exceptiojis at the publication 
of them, while the vindication of truth renders it neces-. 
sary. 

Those documents have already had an extensive circu- 
lation in ?nanuscripU if certain gentlemen have' done 
us the justice to spread, them as far as they have circulated 
opposite documents and reports. 



VINDICATION, &c. 

IN August 1805, the parish committee for sup- 
plying the desk of the North Parish in Hi/igkam, con- 
tracted with Mr. Richardson to supply the same, four 
Sabbaths.* 

In the mean time there appeared to be some few per- 
sons disaffected, and by their conduct, it was generally 
understood, in the Parish, those few were determined to 
prevent his further continuance as a candidate. Ac- 
cordingly there were soon circulated many wounding 
reports concerning him, calculated to destroy his char- 
acter and usefulness. 

At a legal Parish meeting, August 22, 1805, it was 
voted to continue their candidate eight Sabbaths longer. 

Impressed with the importance of proceeding with be- 
coming prudence in the weighty concern of settling a 
Minister, the Parish felt it their duty to ascertain what 
was truth concerning the various reports prejudicial to 
the character of their candidate. 

Accordingly at a legal meeting on the 14th of October, 
1805, the Parish instructed their committee to inquire 
into Mr. Richardson's character, and make report to the 
Parish, what information they might depend upon, with 
regard to his former conduct. 

At a legal meeting on the 9th of December, the com- 
mittee exhibited their information and called upon all 
persons to produce any thing to the contrary. The 
committee reported as follows : " From the best infor- 
mation we can obtain, we believe Mr. Richardson, a 
gentleman of a good moral character, as the following 
documents will abundantly testify.t 

Here follow the documents. 

* It has been reported that the first Parish in Hingham were influenced by political 
motives in settling Mr, Richardson. But tiie following fact shews how much truth 
there is in the report. Mr. Richardson was first introduced by the application of 
Dr. Levi Lincoln, one of the committee for supplying the desk, accompanied by 
E.BEN'. Gay, Esq. Whoever knows the politics of those gentlemen, will not pretend 
that they wire influenced by a political partiality, to emp'oy Mr. R. as a candidate. 

+ l)r Morse had been earnestly enquired of by that committee to ascertain wheth- 
er he knew any thing against the character of Mr. R. But he stated no charge against 
him, noi g^ve any icason to believe his character did not stand fair. 



Hanover, (N. H.) 50tk August, 1802. 
It is hereby certified, that Mr. Joseph Richardson is a 
membert of the Church of Christ at Dartmouth College, 
and that he is in regular and good standing. 

He is recommended to the Christian care, fellowship, 
and communion of any regular Church of Christ, where- 
ever God, in his providence, may call him to be, or to 
reside. By JOHN SMITH,* Pastor of said Church at 

Dartmouth College. 

At a meeting of the Andover association!!, October 
4th, 1803, Mr. Joseph Richardson, having applied for 
approbation, and having satisfied ourselves respecting 
his moral character, theological studies, and qualifica- 
tions, we do hereby recommend him to the notice and 
employment of the Churches of Christ, w T herever God, 
in his providence, shall call him. 

WILLIAM SYMMES, Moderator/* 
JONA. FRENCH, Scribe^. 

Rev. Dr. Cumtngs of Billerica, in a letter of January 
2d, 1804, to Dr. Morse, wrote thus : « This is to inform 
you that Mr. Joseph Richardson, the bearer, was born 
in Billerica, of reputable parents, and that his home has 
been, for the most part, in his native town, and in a 
town adjoining.** His character is fair, and as far as I 
have heard, he has had the reputation of good morals 
from his youth up. I believe you will find him a young 
gentleman of a good disposition and promising talents, 
and worthy of your friendly patronage.*" 



+ He was admitted into said Church the second year of his residence at College. 

X Rev. Dr. Smith is Professor of the learned languages, and one of the immediate 
Government of College. The Government of College, who were all members of the 
same Church, certainly were not ignorant of Mr. R's deportment. 

|| The Andover Association are in the neighborhood of Bi//erica, the place where 
Mr. R. was born and lived, excepting when pursuing his studies preparatory to his 
public education. 

§ Rev. Dr. Symmes, of Andover. 

5 Rev. Mr. French, Andover. 

** He fitted for College at Tewksbury. 

* This letter was addressed to Dr. Morse, who was supposed to be a Trustee of 
the school in which Mr. R. was engaged as an Instructor, 



6 

Ckarlestown, August 16, 1805. 
Having been applied to hy the committee from the 
North Parish mHingham, to know the character of Mr. 
Richardson, we say, as far as we have had an opportu- 
nity of knowing him,f we find him to be a very good 
school-master, and in all other respects as far as our 
knowledge of him, is, that of an honest, moral, good 
man. DAVID GOODWIN,t 

THOMAS HARRIS, 
MATTHEW BRIDGE. 

Charlestowri) October 25, 1805. 
We the subscribers, selectmen of the town of Charles- 
town, having been desired to express our opinion of Mr. 
Richardson since his residence in this town, are com- 
pelled injustice to say, that as a gentleman he is highly 
respectable, frank, open, and sociable : that in the ca- 
pacity of an instructor he has given very general satis- 
faction both to parents and children ; as a moral and 
good man, we believe his character to be fair and ex- 
emplary : We do not hesitate to say further, that if any 
illiberal surmises, or dishonorable charges have been 
hinted to this gentleman's prejudice, we believe them to 
be wholly groundless. 

We further give him the testimony of our highest res- 
pect and best wishes, and should esteem it a misfortune 
to lose him as a public instructor. 

NATHANIEL HAWKINS,|| ^ 

RICHARD FROTHINGHAM, Selectmen 

DANIED TUFTS, 

SOLOMON PHIPPS, }■ of 

JONATHAN TEEL, 

JABEZ FROTHINGHAM, Charlestown. 

TIMOTHY THOMPSON, jun. J 

i He had then been employed as an Instructor of the School about two years. 

\ Mr. It's conduct as an Instructor was under the immediate inspection of those 
gentlemen* Trustees, and they were well acquainted with his private character. The 
above named gentlemen have for a number of years represented the Town of Charles- 
lawn in our Legislature. We presume to say their reputation for integrity is un- 
questionable. 

|| A number of those gentlemen have served as Selectmen of the Town of Charles- 
ibxun for many years, and two of them, lately, as Representatives in the General Court. 



Hingham, December 9, 1805. 

This certifies, that Mr. Joseph Richardson and I fitted 
for College together ; that we were class-mates and 
chums the whole time, being nearly two years ; that we 
entered Dartmouth College together, roomed and board- 
ed together, the four years of our residence at College, 
and that since we graduated our acquaintance has been 
intimate ; that Mr. Richardson sustained a distinguish- 
edly religious character whilst we were fitting for Col- 
lege, and whilst we were at College ; that he was un- 
commonly charitable to the poor, and liberal in contri- 
butions to promote the public happiness. Thus far is 
fact. 

Having been so long and so intimately acquainted 
with Mr. Richardson, my opinion of his natural temper 
may be required. 

I therefore in sincerity certify, that I consider ■ him of 
an open, generous, benevolent heart, and of a temper 
naturally sanguine and habitually inclined to virtue. 

NATHANAEL HUSE * 

We would also add in this place a letter from Deacon 
Goodwin. 

Cfcarlestozv/i, December 19, 1805. 
Dear Sir, 

I received your letter of the 14th instant, in which 
you inform me of a report that I would not, if again call- 
ed upon, give my opinion as I have heretofore done, 
with the other Trustees, in favor of Mr. Richardson's mo- 
ral character. I know not from what quarter they get 
such fabulous reports!. They were so untrue that I 
now with pleasure embrace this opportunity, again to 
confirm my former good opinion of Mr. Richardson's 
moral character, so far as I have any knowledge of him. 
I have frequently been in company with him, and often 
find him at Dr. Stillman's lectures, and observe, when 

* Mr. Huse's character stands remarkably fair. His veracity has never to our 
knowledge been impeached. .... 

+ It being reported by the opposersthat Deacon Goodwin would not il agam cr.L- 
ed upon, give a favorable opinion of Mr. R. : he was written to by the friends of Mr. 
R, and in answer he wrote the above letter. 



8 

returning home with him, that he always introduces re- 
ligious subjects? and appears to be fond of conversing 
upon them. 

I am always ready to support the character of the in- 
nocent and virtuous, which I think is the character of 
Mr. Joseph Richardson ; and in addition thereto can 
conscientiously say, as one of the board of Trustees, I 
am very much pleased w T ith him as a school-master, and 
can further say, the scholars under his care both love 
and respect him, as far as I can find out : and should it 
please the Great Head of the Church to settle him a- 
mong you, I pray God to make him a lasting blessing to 
the dear Church and Congregation ; and may the God 
of love and peace dwell with you all, is the praver of 
your friend, DAVID GOODWIN* 

True Copies. 

Such are the documents referred to by the committee 
instructed to collect information concerning the charac- 
ter of Mr. Richardson, and on which they grounded 
their report")". 

But these documents, ample as they are, appear to have 
had no influence upon the minds of those, who seem to 
have been predetermined by reasons, other than those, 
which respect moral character. A remonstrance of the 
disaffected party was drawn up and signed, before the 
result of this meeting was known, at which the forego- 
ing report was made, and documents were exhibited. 

The reader will judge whether it was fair and honest 
for certain characters to influence people to commit 
themselves by signing their names to a protest contain- 
ing charges against Mr. Richardson, before they had 
knowledge of what the committee appointed might pro- 
duce in his favor. 

On adjournment of the meeting on the said 9th of De- 
cember to the next day, " it was voted to invite Mr. Jo- 
seph Richardson, to settle in the Parish, in the Gospel 

* Deacon Goodwin's character is distinguished for piety, candor, and impartiali- 
ty. He was President of the Trustees, andfrequently inspected the school taught, by 
Mr. R. 

1 Observe the preceding report of the committee. 



9 

Ministry, there being one hundred and eleven votes of 
the qualified voters, and sixty votes of persons of twenty- 
one years of age and upwards, not legally qualified, in 
favor of the invitation ; and forty-one votes against it*.'* 

There had not yet been any Church meeting upon the 
subject : The season of the year being cold and inclem- 
ent, several Church-members confined with sickness, arid 
a number being unable to attend a Church-meeting at 
that time, by reason of age and infirmity, who were also 
deeply interested in the concerns of the Church, it was 
judged most proper, and equally fair and valid, to dis- 
pense with a formal meeting, and to unite with the Parish, 
by a written instrument, which was done by a majority. 

But the disaffected members of the Church, thinking 
to take advantage of this measure, pretend that on the 
9th of January 1806, a meeting of the Church was hol- 
den, < when it was voted to non-concur the doings of 
the Parish in the call of Mr. Richardson, and protest a- 
gainst the same.' 

In answer to this pretence we beg leave to say, that 
on the said 9th of January, 1806, no regular Church- 
meeting was hoi den. 

No object of a Church-meeting was generally known ; 
none was warned at the usual time, in the customary 
manner, or was holden at the stated place. 

It is stated, however, by a paper containing the doings 
of the disaffected, there was, on the said 9th of January, 
a meeting of twenty-one members in the Derby Acacle- 
myf . There were at the same time forty-six male mem- 
bers of the Church, resident in the Parish. That twen- 
ty-one could not have constituted a majority, especially 
as one of the number was John Bfal, a member of the 
Church at Cohasset, whose relation never was removed 
to the first Church in Hingham%. 

* Defamatory letters had been, for a numher of weeks, industriously circulated, in 
order to increase opposition. 

+ Had a Church-meeting been regularly called, it is confidently believed, and 
can be satisfactorily proved that those twenty-one disaffected persons would not have, 
constituted a majority. 

\. It lias been reported th.t a iraj'ority of the Churrh were opposed to the settle- 
ment of Mr. Richardson. This can not be true, unless that number, twenty mem- 
bers in regular standing, be more than half'of forty-six. 

B 



10 

There were several circumstances accompanying that 
pretended meeting-, Which, without exaggeration, would 
not very favorably impress the reader, respecting the 
conduct of those disaffected persons. Though justice 
demand a full exposition of facts, candor recoils from 
such sever') tv. 

As the dhhculties and disputes remained unsettled, it 
was proposed that the Parish at large on one part, and 
Mr. Richardson on the other, unite in calling a refer- 
ence composed of Ministers, to whose consideration the 
difficulties and disputes should be submitted. 

Accordingly the Rev. Dr. Cumings of Billerica, Rev. 
Dr. Osgood of Medford, Rev. Mr. Bentley of Salem, 
Rev. Mr. Foster of Littleton, and Rev. Mr. Green of 
Maiden, being agreed on and called, convened at Charles- 
town on the 25th of February, 1806*. This reference 
was holden at Charles/own, that Dr. Morse and several 
others, who were reported authors of the wounding 
charges against the character of Mr. Richardson, might 
have a fair opportunity to support what they had alledg- 
ed to his disadvantage. 

The protest containing the charges against Mr. Rich- 
ardson's character, and signed by his opposers at Iling- 
ham, was produced and laid before the reference. 

Although by signing their names they were thus 
pledged to support their charges, and although Dr. Morse 
and all others were expressly and seasonably required 
to appear, yet no one appeared to sustain a single charge 
against Mr. Richardson. Although Dr. Morse, at the 
particular and earnest request of the people of Hi?igham y 
did appear before the reference, ancl did acknowledge 
he liad written* to llingham against Mr. Richardson ; and 
although the Rev. gentlemen of the reference solicited 
Dr. Mors:;, he could not be prevailed upon to show what 
he had written or to state any charge whatever. 

* Three of those gentlemen do not accord with Mr. R. in politics. The opposers, 
Fore, could have i o ground to suspect that injustice would be done them, by rea- 
son ' i political prejudice. If truth and righteousness were their object, it is difficult 
to Bsiign any good or sufficient reason for their -net appearing before such an impartial 
and respectable tribunal 



11 

On this, one of the Rev. gentlemen of the reference 
observed to Dr. Morse, " If you have written a letter to' 
Hingham against the young man, I wish for my own 
part you would produce it and let us see what you have 
against him. If I had undertaken to write any thing 
against a young man, I should feel myself bound to 
support it," or words to that effect*. 

But all these things availed nothing. Dr. Mdrfss ob- 
jected!, and said that Ckar!estoiv;f\\\i$ not a proper place- 
to settle those matters. 

At length the reference, finding an investigation of 
the matters, which they expected would be laid before 
them, impracticable, as the accusers refused io exhibit 
them, they formed the Following result : 

Ckarlestown, February 25, 1807. 

The undersigned Ministers being invited by the Par- 
ish in Hingham and Mr. Joseph Richardson, to investi- 
gate his moral character ; having read a remonstrance 
of the dissatisfied people of said Hingham, containing; 
allegations against Mr. Richardson, but ifo persons ap- 
pearing to support said allegations— we are "utterly una- 
ble to form any judgment upon the subject — and are 
constrained to recommend it to Mr. Richardson and the 
people of Hingham) as the only regular expedient for, set- 
tling their differences, to convene a mutual ecclesiastical 
council to judge and decide upon all matters of dispute 
among them. 

HENRY CUMING8, 
. • DAVID OSGOOD, 

WILLIAM BENTLEY, 
EDMUND FOSTER, 
AARON GREEN. 

The Parish having been at so much trouble and ex- 
pense to afford the dissatisfied persons a fair opportunity 
to terminate existing disputes, and as they thus shunned 

* Can a man conceal an instrument, with which lie has wounded the reputation of 
another, unless it be from, fear of detection and merited punishment ? 

t He acknowledged there could not have been a bod)- of Ciergvuac i found in tko 
Commonwealth-, in whose judgment he could mure Cully coi.fide. 



12 

an investigation, it raised strong suspicion that their 
cause rested on a trembling foundation*. 

Stiil conciliatory measures were the wish and object 
of the Parish. 

Agreeably to the recommendation of the ministers, 
composing the reference at Ckarlestown, the people of 
Hingham at a legal meeting on the 8th of March, 1806, 

" Voted that the Parish contract with Mr. Joseph Rich- 
ardson as their public teacher of religion, till such time 
as he shall be ordained over the Church and Congrega- 
tion as a Gospel Minister, with this provision : When- 
ever the opposers wish to call a reference! of Gospel 
Ministers on these conditions, viz. the opposition two> 
his friends two, and Mr. Richardson two, and Mr. R. and 
his opposers a seventh to investigate his moral character ; 
and if in their opinion his moral character be such, as 
not to disqualify him for being a Minister of the Gospel, 
then the above named contract is null and void." 

This proposition was rejected. Another was made, 
that the Parish should relinquish their ideas of rightt, and 
meet the opposers on their own ground, which was a 
claim to one half of a Council. 

Here follows the proposition. 

Hingham, Aprils, 1806. 

To Gen. Benjamin Lincoln and others, protesters a- 
gainst the proceedings of the North Parish in Hingham, 
in calling Joseph Richardson to the pastoral care of the 
Church and Congregation of said Parish : 

As the allegations contained in your solemn protest a- 
gainst my moral character remain still unsupported by 
proper evidence, before any impartial tribunal, chosen 
by the parties concerned ; I am now authorized by the 

* The opposers agent, Mr. Aunlr Lincoln, acknowledged they had the highest 
respect for t e venerable gentlemen who composed the reference. 

+ The people of Hinghdm for s-.veral reasons preferred a Reference composed of 
Minister^, to a Council, i. Because dispensing with a delegation from the Churches 
would be saving timeand trouble. 2. Because in a case of difficult investigation, a 
Dumber ol Ministers might be preferable to the same number of Ministers and dele- 
gates 3. Because a result of Ministers would probably have most weight 10 satisfy all. 

; For the sake of peace and harmony, the mends of Mr. R, yielded what t] 
maintained bo be thc-r right. 



IB 

Consent. of my friends, to make you this proposition of 
a method of adjusting ail differences respecting my mo- 
ral character : That a reference consisting of live* Gos- 
pel Ministers be chosen in the following manner, and 
with the following restrictions, viz. 

1. That the parties agree in choosing a Moderator. 

2. That the others be chosen, two by the opposers 
and two by my friends. 

3. That no other question be submitted to the con- 
sideration of said reference than this ; Whether my mor- 
al character be found by investigation really such as to 
disqualify me, or render me an unsuitable person, for 
the office of a Gospel Minister, 

4. That the parties obligate themselves to abide by 
the result of said reference. Should the result deter- 
mine my moral character to be such as disqualifies me for 
the office of a Gospel Minister, then are my friends ob- 
ligated to relinquish me. If on the other hand the ref- 
erence determine my moral character and conduct in 
life to be such, as not to disqualify .me for the office a- 
foresaid, then are all my opposers bound to relinquish 
all opposition to my settlement as the Gospel Minister 
of the North, or First Parish in Hi?igham. 

5. That if either of the parties decline producing their 
evidence, it shall be considered as giving up the cause 
of that party. 

Gen. B. Lincoln, Sir, be pleased to qommunlcate 
the within written proposition to the aforementioned 
protesters and favor me with information of their reso- 
lutions on the subject. 

With due respect, 

' JOSEPH RICHARDSON, 
Gen. Lincoln! . 

This last proposition was rejected, but was followed 
with a proposition of the opposers in these terms. At a 
legal meeting on the 17th of April, 1806, they made a 

* Such a number was judged competent to the most thorough investigation, and 
likely to form the most impartial result. 

i Gen, Lincoln's name was at the head of the protestors. 



12 

an investigation, it raised strong suspicion that their 
cause rested on a trembling foundation*. 

Still conciliatory measures were the wish and object 
of the Parish. 

Agreeably to the recommendation of the ministers, 
composing the reference at Ckarlestown, the people of 
Hingham at a legal meeting on the 8th of March, 1806, 

" Voted that the Parish contract with Mr. Joseph Rich- 
ardson as their public teacher of religion, till such time 
as he shall be ordained over the Church and Congrega- 
tion as a Gospel Minister, with this provision : When- 
ever the opposers wish to call a reference! of Gospel 
Ministers on these conditions, viz. the opposition tzvo> 
his friends two, and Mr. Richardson two, and Mr. R. and 
his opposers a seventh to investigate his moral character ; 
and if in their opinion his moral character be such, as 
not to disqualify him for being a Minister of the Gospel, 
then the above named contract is null and void." 

This proposition was rejected. Another was made, 
that the Parish should relinquish their ideas of rightj, and 
meet the opposers on their own ground, which was a 
claim to one half of a Council. 
Here follows the proposition. 

Hingham, April 4, 1806. 

To Gen. Benjamin Lincoln and others, protesters a- 
gainst the proceedings of the North Parish in Hingham, 
in calling Joseph Richardson to the pastoral care of the 
Church and Congregation of said Parish : 

As the allegations contained in your solemn protest a- 
gainst my moral character remain still unsupported by 
proper evidence, before any impartial tribunal, chosen 
by the parties concerned ; I am now authorized by the 

* The opposers agent, Mr. Abner Lincoln, acknowledged they had the highest 
respect for t: c venerable gentlemen who composed the reference. 

t The people of Bingham for several reasons preferred a Reference composed of 
Minister?, to n Council, i. Because dispensing with a delegation from the Churches 
would be saving timeandtrouble. 2. Because in a case of difficult investigation, a 
number of Ministers might be preferable to the same number of Ministers and dele- 
gates. 3. Because a result of Ministers would probably have most weight to satisfy all. 

X For the sake of peace and harmony, the friends of Mr. R, yielded what t] 
maintained fro be their right. 



13 

Consent of my friends, to make you this proposition of 
a method of adjusting all differences respecting my mo- 
ral character : That a reference consisting of five* Gos- 
pel Ministers be chosen in the following manner, and 
with the following restrictions, viz. 

1. That the parties agree in choosing a Moderator. 

2. That the others be chosen, two by the opposers 
and two by my friends. 

3. That no other question be submitted to the con- 
sideration of said reference than this ; Whether my mor- 
al character be found by investigation really such as to 
disqualify me, or render me an unsuitable person, for 
the office of a Gospel Minister. 

4. That the parties obligate themselves to abide by 
the result of said reference. Should the result deter- 
mine my moral character to be such as disqualifies me for 
the office of a Gospel Minister, then are my friends ob- 
ligated to relinquish me. If on the other hand the ref- 
erence determine my moral character and conduct in 
life to be such, as not to disqualify .me for the office a- 
foresaid, then are all my opposers bound to relinquish 
all opposition to my settlement as the Gospel Minister 
of the North, or First Parish in Hitighanu 

5. That if either of the parties decline producing their 
evidence, it shall be considered as giving up the cause 
of that party. 

Gen. B. Lincoln, Sir, be pleased to communicate 
the within written proposition to the aforementioned 
protesters and favor me with information of their reso- 
lutions on the subject. 

With due respect, 

JOSEPH RICHARDSON. 
Gen. Lincoln!. 

This last proposition was rejected, .but was followed 
with a proposition of the opposers in these terms. At a 
legal meeting on the 17th of April, 1806, they made a 

* Such a number was judged competent to the most thorough investigation, and 
likely to form the most impartial result. 

t Gen. Lincoln's name was at the head of the protestors. 



14 

motion u to see if the Parish will propose to Mr. Joseph 
Richardson to agree with his opposers in calling a refer- 
ence of eleven or thirteen* Congregational Ministers, 
one of whom to be agreed upon by him and his oppo- 
sers, the others to be chosen, one half by him and the 
other by them, to inquire into his moral character, and 
on the following conditions ; — That after hearing all 
the allegations that shall be brought before them against 
his character and conduct, together with the evidence in 
support of the same, and his defence ; if they should 
then give it as their opinion, that he is a man of a good 
moral character and true pietyt, and as such do recom- 
mend him, as really suitable for a Gospel Minister, then 
the opposers shall withdraw their opposition." 

The Parish did not comply with this proposition!:. 

They n^xt made a motion " to see if the Parish would 
give their consent that the opposers should be set off in- 
to a separate Parish or Society, by such an act as the 
Legislature should think proper to grant, and as is usual 
in like incorporations." 

This vote w T as unanimously carried in the affirmative 
without the least debate. 

The people of the first Parish in Ilingham cheerfully 
adopted this measure, especially as they received from 
the opposers the most unequivocal assurances, that it 
should terminate all disputes respecting the settlement of 
Mr. Richardson. 

Bat what was the sincerity of these assurances will 
appear in the sequel. 

As such of the opposers as were members of the 
Church had previously separated themselves in commu- 
nion of word and seals, although without the consent of 
the Church, which is a direct violation of the platform 
of the New-England Churches, and contrary to their es- 

* live or seven capable men were considered by the Parish equally competent to de- 
termine such a case as a greater number. 

1 This was objected agailjfct as inconsistent, and as a point that none but the omni- 
scient Searcher of hearts could determine. 

\ The reader will judge whether the propositions of Mr. R's friends were unreason- 
able, 



15 

tablished usages, the first Church and Parish felt them- 
selves perfectly at liberty to make arrangements for tha 
ordination of their candidate*. 

A Church meeting was duly notified and regularly 
convened on the 10th of June, 1806, for the purpose of 
making arrangements ; at which time the opposers in 
the Church who had thus separated themselves in a dis- 
orderly manner, and who were voted off by the Parish, 
came into the meeting and opposed every measure ; but 
being a minority, as they ever had been, they carried 
no point. 

It has been reported that there was not a majority Iii 
the Church in favor of Mr. Richardson till the number 
was increased. This report is not correct. There was 
an addition made to the Church, after the opposers in 
the Church had, for many sabbaths, held communion of 
word and seals in the Derby Academy, and had asked 
of the Parish a vote of separation, which was unani- 
mously granted ; and had petitioned the Legislature to 
be incorporated. 

Those who were added to the Church stood at least 
the usual time propounded, and were regularly admitted. 
If it were .improper that they should be admitted into 
the Church, why did not the opposers come forward 

* The opposers left the Meeting-house previous to the vote of separation, and with 
a number of the Parish held public worship in the Derby Academy. Although they 
had separated in this (as we conceive) irregular manner, and adopted a mode of proce- 
dure calculated to destroy all order in society and to prostitute the established institu- 
tions of religion, yet in this disorganized state they were countenanced by some Cler- 
gymen, especially by Professor Ware, who in his farewell discourse to the Paris!'. 
little more than a year preceding, addressed them thus : " 1 would avail myself oi 
this, opportunity, at the close of my ministerial life in this place, to offer you my un- 
feigned acknowledgements for the many friendly attentions I have received from this 
society, during the whole course of my residence here, and for the numerous acts of 
substantial kindness, which have contributed to render my abode among you comfort- 
able and pleasant. These specimens of your benevolence, and proofs of your affection 
I have always held most precious. I shall still cherish the grateful remembrance ei 
them, and carry it with me to the last moment of my life." 

Professor Ware did no more than justice in such acknowledgements, for the de- 
preciation of money ever since his settlement had been fully made up to him, and tl e 
Parish had engaged to rmke it good for the future. \ 

Now without knowledge of the merits of the disputes rt Hinoham, (unless by fgu 
report) excepting on one side, and without the least personal acquaintance with ibr 
candidate, the Parish had called to settle by a majority of about i 70 to about 40. Pro 
fessor Wa^e comes into the Parish to uphold such a minority by preaching For tj 
and administering the sacraments to them in the Derby Academv, thus commta 
them for their conduct- Let the candid judge of these things. '. 



16 

with their objections ; for neither their delicacy nor 
sense of propriety prevented them coming intoine Cnurch 
on a subsequent occasion to oppose their proceedings r 
Surely if they had constituted a majority in the Church 
they might have prevented her increase ; hut this they 
did not attempt. 

The Church and Parish proceeded to make arrange 
ments for ordination. The 2d of July, 18Qo, was ap- 
pointed for the day, and letters missive were sent to the 
following Ministers and Churches. 

Rev. Dr. Cumings and Church of Billerica. 
Rev. Mr. Le Barron and Church of Rochester, 
Rev. Mr. Barker and Church of Middleboro\ 
Rev. Mr. Bentley and Church of Salem. 
Rev. Mr. Foster and Church of Littleton. 
Rev. Mr. Briggs and Church of Plimpton, 
And the Church of TewJcsbury. 

But it was clearly ascertained that the opposers were 
determined to create every obstruction, in their power, 
to prevent the contemplated ordination : This was not 
merely a surmise. The following document fell into 
the hands of the Parish. 

" At a meeting of the opposers on the 16th of June — 
chose Samuel Norton, Esq.. Moderator. 

Voted to choose a committee of nine to collect all the 
oral and written evidence against him (Mr. Richardson) 
and adopt all such measures as they think proper, and 
that will most effectually tend to prevent his settlement 
in this Parish, and support the same before the ordaining 
Council. 

T. THAXTER, jun. Clerk. 

The candid reader will judge how far the preceding 
resolution is consistent with separating from the Church, 
asking and obtaining of the Parish leave of separation, 
petitioning the Legislature and preparing to build ano- 
ther Meeting-house. 

Mr. Richardson's opposers and accusers were re- 
quested by him to appear before the ordaining Council, 



17 

not to oppose his ordination, but to support the grievous 
charges they had alledged against him*. 

The following is a copy of the letters addressed to Dr. 
Morse and others, who were referred to by the opposers 
as witnesses, to support their charges. 

Hingham^ June ■' 19, 1806. 
Sir, 
As information prejudicial to my character is attribu- 
ted to you as the author, by certain gentlemen of-Hing- 
ham ; and as a Council will convene at Ilingham, on 
Tuesday, the first day of July next, before whom I shall 
stand to be judged ; — I earnestly request you to appear 
before said Council to state any thing you know against 
my character. 

With due respect, 

JOSEPH RICHARDSON. 

The following is a copy of the letter addressed to 
Gen. Lincoln, upon the same occasion. 

Hzngham, June 27, 1806. 
Gen. Benjamin Lincoln, Sir, 

Your name is at the head of many others, pledged to 
support several highly colored allegations against my mo- 
ral character, contained in a protest against the proceed- 
ings of the inhabitants of the North Parish in Hinghai-ih in- 
calling me to settle as their Gospel Minister. 

On Tuesday, the first day of July next, a Council 
will convene at the house of Mr. Hawkes Fearinc, at 
9 o'clock, A. M. 

Before this Council I am prepared to meet my accu- 
sers face to face, and to be judged concerning the charg- 
es you ailed ge against me. 

Sir, I call on you, and all others of the protesters, to 
produce your witnesses at that time and place, that they 
may be heard, to support your charges. 



* Let this circumstance he kept in view, that the Parish never called upon the op- 
posers to shew reasons why his friends should not causehim to be ordained ; but Mr, 

tnd 

.icern 

religion, in justification of their opposicior 

rr.er' oi Mr; R. important in the cause of religion. 

C 



posers to snew reasons wny ins mends should not cause him to be ordained ; but M 
R. called upon them to substantiate what they had alledged, that they might be foun 
trjj§, or, that his character might stand fair. Possibly they may plead a deep to.icer 
ior the honor and interest of religion, in justification of their opposition to the settl* 



18 

Sir, I appeal to the tribunal of your own conscience, 
whether principles of uprightness, integrity and honor, 
do not solemnly demand that you support those charges, 
wounding to my name, or suffer me to obtain the justice 
of an acquittal. 

Sir, I am with due respect, 

JOSEPH RICHARDSON. 
Gen. B. Lincoln. 

- 

On the day appointed the Council convened, consist- 
ing of 

Rev. Mr. Barker, and one delegate from Middleboro\ 

Rev. Mr. Bentley and one delegate from Salem. 

Rev. Mr. Briggs and one delegate from Plimpton. 

And two delegates from the church at Tewkshury. 

Rev. Dr. Cumings and delegate did not attend for rea- 
sons contained in the following letter. 



i & 



Billerica, June 22, 1806. 
Gentlemen and fellow Christians, 

I have received your letter, in behalf of the North 
Church in Hingham, requesting my attendance, with a 
delegate from the Church of which I am pastor, on 
Wednesday, July 2, 1 806, to assist in the ordination of 
a Gospel Minister. 

It is painful to my feelings to inform you, that con- 
ceiving it to be inconsistent with a due regard to myself,, 
in my advanced stage in life, to comply with your re- 
quest, I am obliged to decline it. I have fallen into the 
eve of life, and very sensibly feel the decays of health 
and vigor, and the debilities of old age, which cannot 
but render the service, which you request, very burden- 
some and fatiguing ; especially considering the heat of 
the season and the distance of ITingham from Billerica, 
and more especially the perplexity of the business, which 
from the circumstances of your affairs, I suppose must 
come Before the Council prior to ordination, which will 

essarily require too close and lengthy attentions for 
(lie present state of my mind and faculties. For these, 
and some other reasons, that might be mentioned, which 



19 

however do not respect Mr. Richardson*, bat concern 
only myself, I am obliged to excuse myself from the 
service, you request. 

I communicated your letter to the Church, who sup" 
posing, as I should decline attending for the reasons a- 
foresaid, it would answer no good purpose to send a del- 
egate, thought it best not to come to a choice, and ac- 
cordingly dismissed the business. 

My letters respecting Mr. Richardson, to Dr. Morsk 
and others, of which you have copies, sufficiently ex- 
press the favorable ideas I entertained concerning him, 
when he left Billerica. They shew that his character 
then stood fair, in my view. And though it has since 
been impeached by heavy charges, contained in a re- 
monstrance or protest of his opposers, in Hingham j yet 
while he is ready to submit to a thorough investigation, 
and wishes for a fair trial before an impartial tribunal")** 
but cannot obtain it ; let common sense decide, whether 
these unsupported criminations ought to be considered 
as evidence, that he has forfeited his former reputation, 

I most heartily wish you and your pastor elect, divine 
guidance and direction • and devoutly pray? that when 
the contemplated sacred connection between him and 
you shall be formed, it may prove a happy source of mu- 
tual blessings and comforts, till Providence shall dissolve 
the important tie. 

Accept, brethren, my 

Respectful consideration* 

HENRY CUMINGR. 
Messrs. Thomas FearIxYg, 
Isaac Gushing, 
Seth Lincoln. 

The Letters, referred to by Dr. Cumings in this last, 
addressed to others besides Dr. Morse, are the following. 

* It has been reported that the reason Dr. Cumings did not attend the ordination 
was, that he had discarded Mr. Richardson. Any one may see by the above letter 
how much truth there is in the report. 

t Tins remark was predicated on the proposals which had been made to agree irj 
calling a reference. 



20 

Billerica, September 24, 1805. 
Rev. Sir, 

Yours of the 17th instant I have received. To your 
request in behalf of some gentlemen of Hingham I an- 
swer briefly as follows. 

Mr. Richardson who as I understand from you is 
preaching at Hingham, was born in Billerica. His fa- 
ther died when he was young and his mother, some 
time after was married to a second husband in Tewks- 
iury, a neighboring Town. His home for the most part 
until he entered Dartmouth College, was in his native 
Town, and the said Town of Tewksbury. About a year 
after the completion of his College education, he taught 
a school in Billerica several months to universal 'accept- 
ance. He then came into my house and resided with 
me about half a year for the purpose of pursuing theolo- 
gical studies. So far as I know, he left the Town with 
a fair character and the reputation of good morals from 
his youth up. Before he left my family I never heard 
his conduct censured by any, except in the instance of 
a supposed violation of a promise of marriage to a young 
woman, to whom he had paid some particular attention. 

The young lady has since commenced an action at 
Law against him for damages, and obtained a verdict in 
her favor. This law-suit has left an impression greatly 
to his disadvantage on the minds of many. But as the 
affair by appeal is still subjudice, I shall give no a opiniori 
about it, how it will terminate time must discover. 

If the circulating reports which you speak of prejudi- 
cial to his character relate to any instances of his con- 
duct, since he entered into the school at Charlestown, I 
have not sufficient information myself to decide upon 
them. In regard to politics*, his caution and reserve 
while he resided with me prevented my getting acquaint- 
ed with his sentiments, though I was wont to express 

* This gives a cJue to the great subject of deep concern, and to the information 
which -appears to have been requested of Dr. Cumings, " In regard to Politics." It 
is by no means probable that Dr. Cu.ming.s undertook to acquaint the people of 
HiTigh m respecting the politics of a candidate, without a paiticular request. 



21 

myself freely on the subject. It is said he has chosen 
his side* and is no neutral character. 

I shall only add, that if a christian society cannot ob- 
tain satisfaction, either from the public performances or 
private conversation of a candidate, as to his sentiments 
respecting the leading principles of religion, it cannot 
reasonably be supposed they will harmonize in the choice 
of him for a minister. 

Dear Sir, your affectionate and 
Hearty Friend, 

HENRY -CUMINGS, 
Rev. Peter Whitney!. 

Second Letter referred to. 

" Billerica, Nov. 26, 1805. 
Dear Sir, 

I was not a little surprised to hear that my letter re- 
commending Mr. Joseph Richardson, to the patronage 
of Dr. Morse, had been made use of to vindicate him 
against unfavorable reports concerning him, which re- 
fer to instances of his conduct posterior to the date of 
said letter, as if I had pledged myself for his future 
c orrect behaviorf. 

The letter aforesaid expresses my ideas of Mr. Rich 
ardson, at the time when it was written, at which time 
I presumed with good reason as I thought, that by a pro 
priety of conduct he would secure and enjoy that pa- 
tronage which I solicited for him. If he has forfeited 
and lost it by improper behavior, my expectations arc 
disappointed, but I do not feel myself answerable. 

* Mr. RrcHARDsoN's political character has been decided and uniform, ever sipcp 
he was susceptible of this truth, that :; all men are born free and equal." His political, 
character was known before he entered College, while there, and ever since, as con- 
stantly as opportunity was afforded him to act any p d rt. It is believed he is not in- 
clined to be clamorous about -his political sentiments. From no more than a modest 
deference toward Dr. Cu kings, he might have been silent on the subject. 

t Rev. Mr. Whitney is Minister ot:Quincy. 

£ T^is letti r was addressed *o Mr. AbNer Lincoln, in answer to his. It ap- 
pears by Dr. Cumings' answer that Mr. Abner Lincoln, attempted to lead him 
to believe an undue advantage had been taken of his letter. This probably was Mr. 
Lincoln's pretence for writing to Dr Cumings. 

Can any thing be more absurd than a pretence that a letter could be ufsd to defend 
a man's c. ?;racter and conduct subsequent to the date of said letter ? Dr. Cumi ngs' 
letter was used only to vindicate Mr. R's character and conduct prior to the date. 



22 

As to the affair between him and the young woman, 
who charges him with a violation of a promise of mar- 
riage (which he denies) paid who has on that ground oil- 
ed him for damages, I would only observe, that as there 
was never any suggestion of criminal intimacy that I 
know of, I am fully persuaded that had the affair never 
been prosecuted in law (as it was almost a year after his 
leaving my house) it would soon have been buried in 
oblivion by the generality of his acquaintance, among 
the venial imprudences of inexperienced youth, which 
do not essentially affect character. The law suit is not 
yet ended. 

If you wish for a statement of Mr. Richardson's con- 
duct since he left Billerica, I am not able to give it, hav- 
inghad very little correspondence with him since that time. 

I know there are reports in circulation respecting him, 
calculated to wound his reputation, some of which are so 
circumstanced as to lay a foundation to suspect that all 
is not right. 

The impressions of such a suspicion may reasonably 
restrain me from recommending without further inquiry 
and satisfaction. 

Whatever my apprehensions may be respecting the re- 
sult of a thorough inquiry, I feel myself "obliged tot want 
of sufficient light and evidence, to suspend my judg- 
ment at present upon the question, whether he be guil- 
ty or innocent in the wiiole or in part At the same 
time, christian candor forbids a decided censure, espe- 
cially as I have not conversed with Mr. Richardson on 
the subject and know not what defence he could make, 
or his friends in his behalf. I add, that when I joined 
in approbating him as a candidate for the ministry, I 
viewed him as a fair character of competent literature 
and talents, and a firm believer in the Gospel-doctrine 
of salvation through Christ. What he is now in regard 
to faith or character is another question, that I am not 
better able to answer than yourself*. In regard to doc- 

* It . 'ens by the purport of this letter that exertions and arts were used to extort 
opinion 01 'judgment iroin Dr. CumINGS prejudicial to Mr. R. 



23 

trines, religious sentiments and ministerial abilities, if a 
candidate cannot recommend himself, he must take the 
consequence*. Persuaded the christian society in Hi?ig- 
ham are not destitute of competent judges, I presume 
they never will settle a man who cannot give them ra- 
tional satisfaction on these points, either by his public 
performances or private conversation, though they may 
have no other objections. 

From your representations, I feel anxiously concern- 
ed for the good people in Hi??gham, and with the utmost 
sincerity implore the Father of lights to grant you that 
wisdom which is profitable to direct. 

With respectful consideration, I am, 

Sir, your cordial friend, 

Adieu. 

HENRY CUMINGS. 
Abner Lincoln, Esqf. 

It deserves remark, that these two last letters from 
Dr. Cumings are answers to letters addressed to him, by 
the agents of Mr. Richardson's opposers, and although 
we have not their letters, the answers strongly intimate 
what were their contents^. 

It having been reported that the Rev. Mr. Foster's 
non attendance at the ordination, was owing to personal 
disrespect toward Mr. Richardson, it may be proper to 
introduce in this place his letter assigning reasons for his 
not attending, although it was written some time after- 
ward. 



* It is by this remark clearly the opinion of Dr. Cumings that christian societies 
slone must determine what religious sentiments are agreeable to them, without the in- 
fluence of prejudices or prepossessions attached to party names or the opinions of oth- 
ers. 

+ This gentleman so very officious in his inquiries into Mr. R's character, was of 
late the Preceptor of the Derby Academy, but for reasons well known to theTrusteeSj 
was not continued in that office. 

+ We would with pleasure have published the letters addressed to Dr. Cumings 
by the opposers. They were addressed to him in confidence. If they were devoted 
to the cause of religion, why were they not open and unsuspicious, like the vencrab'.: 
Dgctor's answers ? 



24 

Littleton, March 3, 1 807- 
Rev. & Bear Brother, 

Some weeks have passed since I received a letter from 
you dated 2d December, 1 806, requesting me to state in 
writing the reasons of my not attending your ordination 
— in order to silence certain rumors, « that my absence 
was owing to personal disrespect to you.' in answer 
to such surmises and rumors, I say, that was not the rea- 
son. 

On the evening of the sabbath before I received the 
letters missive from the Church in Hingham, my young- 
est child broke his leg, and the weather being warm, it 
required constant attention. About the same time v my 
horse, in a fright by a thunder storm, w T ounded himself 
dangerously, whereby I was deprived of the use of him 
for several weeks. 

I was then under engagement to preach, and admin- 
ister the ordinances, at Dracut, the sabbath following, 
also to deliver an oration at Littleton, on Friday the 4th 
July — which was only the second day after the one ap- 
pointed for your ordination. 

Such were truly my embarrassments and engage- 
ments at that time. But notwithstanding them, I yet 
went so far as to engag3 a worthy brother in the Church 
in Littleton to accompany me as delegate, to Hingham, 
in case I should conclude to go. 

But when I took into further consideration the cir 
cumstances above mentioned, together with the distance 
from this, to Hingham, and the uncertainty of the wea- 
ther, the labors before me appeared greater than I could 
engage in with prudence, or hope to discharge with ho- 
nor*. I therefore relinquished the design of attending 
your ordination. The reasons are satisfactory to my- 
self, "and I hope they will prove so to others. As to an 
exchange of desks, which you propose; I am entirely 
willing to make it whenever it may be convenient. As 
I never was in the North Parish in Hingham, I should 

* Ret. Mr. Fostjl a was appointed to preach the Ordination Sermon 



25 

take pleasure in a visit there : but as the distance is 
great, I cannot now prefix a time.* 

Your friend and fellow laborer in the gospel, 

EDMUND FOSTER. 

Rev. Jos. Richardson. 

Having laid before the reader all the letters from Rev. 
Dr. Cumings and Rev. Mr. Foster, containing the rea- 
sons for their not attending the ordination at Hingham, 
and fully expressing the favorable sentiments they en- 
tertained of Mr. Richardson, we proceed to give a short 
and correct account of what passed before the Council. 

The Council being formed and prepared, in the usual 
way, to proceed to business, Mr. Richardson wrote to 
his opposers, informing them the Council were ready to 
hear any witnesses in support of the allegations contain- 
ed in their protests against his character. 

Accordingly a committee of the opposers appeared, 
and began the business assigned them with a motion 
that the Council might adjourn to the Meeting-house. It 
was observed, in answer, that the hall appeared to be 
sufficiently spacious for the accommodation of the Coun- 
cil and the respective committees! . It w;is then urged 
that there were niany opposers of Mr. Richardson who 
w T ere anxious to hear what passed. But in answer to 
this, let it be observed, the inquiry or investigation of 
the Council was not instituted to satisfy the minds of Mr. 
Richardson's opposers, who had already broken off com- 
munion of word and seals from the Church and Parish ; 
had obtained of the Parish a unanimous vote of separa- 
tion, and had petitioned the Legislature for an act of in- 
corporation for that purpose, and were actually making 
preparations to build another house of worship. The in- 
quiry into Mr. Richardson's character was to satisfy the 
minds of the Council and of an impartial public. 

The Council could not conveniently have proceeded 

* The distance is about fifty miles. 

t As a numerous committee, agents of the opposers. were admitted into the Coun- 
il and occupied the who$ time they were convened ; what cause could tha opnos^r^ 
for complaining . 

D 



26 

in the business in the midst of a crowd, which must have 
taken place at the Meeting-house*. 

The opposers' committee then requested that a Coun- 
cil, whom they had convened, might be admitted, but 
this was objected to as an unprecented measure and an 
attempt, to intrude upon and embarrass the ordaining 

Council. 

After many similar manoeuvres of the opposers' com- 
mittee, with the permission of the Council they proceed- 
ed to support their allegations or charges. How well 
they succeeded will be seen in their own report, in the 
Rev. Mi". Norton's reply to their report, and in the Rev. 
Mr. Bentley's statement of their proceedings before the 
Council. 

The opposers' committee had collected a great number 
of letters and documents from different sources, and ma- 
ny of them had been in their possession more than six 
months, and had heen secretly and indefatigably circu- 
lated to wound the character of Mr. Richardson while 
he was absent and had no power of defencef. 

It is true that a number of Mr. Richardson's opposers 
called upon him seven or eight months previous to his or- 
dination and read a number of most wounding defama- 
tory letters to him, at which time he most 'earnestly re- 
quested the favor of copies of them ; but they were de- 
nied. His friends repeatedly solicited the perusal of 
them, or the liberty of copying them, that the authors 
might be known, and that they might know what weight 
ought, to be attached to them, but the letters could not 
be obtained. Mr. Richardson repeated his request in 

* Such n measure would have been almost if not quite unprecedented. Besides, the 
and manner, with which this measure was advocated, raised a suspicion, that it 
was designed to open a wide door to disorder and confusion. Nor could an adjourn- 
ment to the Meeting-house, it was believed; answer any valuable purpose. Public cu- 
riosity might, indeed, have been gratified, but would the impartial public from that 
circumstance have derived more correct information of the doings and result of Coun- 
'. il,than they now possess ! 

t" Mr, R.'being l Hingham sometime after these defamatory letters were in circula- 
tion. Col. .; veral others called upon, and read the letters to him, and on be- 
: perusing them or copying them, they utterly refused him the 
Ol i 1 "- motives of their conduct the reader will judge ! 



27 

writing that he might be enabled to make his defence 
against them, but they were still denied him. 

Thus the opposers' committee, instead of producing a- 
ny competent witness, or legal evidence whatever, to 
support tneir high charges of immorality, brought before 
the Council a parcel of letters, which had for a long time 
been in use as before mentioned, and which were writ- 
ten by a number of his political opponents, of whose 
characters nothing will here be said. 

Both these letters, and copies of them, although solic- 
ited by the Council, were refused to be left in their 
hands. 

The Council, after hearing the opposers' committee 
read their letters and documents and comment iupom 
them not less than ten or twelve hours, formed the fol- 
lowing result : 

" The Council having, on that day (1st of Jmy) and 
by adjournment, (on the 2d, till about \i o'clock) con- 
sidered all the objections against the candidate, and hay- 
ing examined the recommendation of the Rev. Dr. Com- 
ings of Bill erica, given to the Trustees of Charles town 
schools, while the candidate was pursuing his theologic- 
al studies at the house of said Dr. CumJngs", of great rep- 
utation in our churches, and having received the favor- 
able testimonies of the Trustees of said schools, and of 
the selectmen of Ghartestown, and having heard no oh* 
jections to the life and doctrine of Mr. Joseph Richard- 
son while in Hingham, and having certificates of his ear- 
ly admission into the christian Church, and of his ex 
emplary deportment from the Professor of Divinity, 'Dr. 
Smith of Dartmouth College, with good assurances of 
his reputation during his collegiate life*, did unanimous- 

* Also the following letter was communicated from Professor Smith. 

Hanover, izth June, 1806. 
Dear Sir, 
The recommendation which you mention as necessary before your ordination, 15 
subjoined to this letter. 

'• My best wishes attend you. As a Minister of Christ, may you be eminently use- 
ful. May Gtji) add' his blessing to your labors ; and grant you abundant success. 
With affectionate regard, I am, 

Dear Sir, your very obedient and 
Humble servant, 

JOHN SMITH 



28 

Jy, on the 2d July, 1 806, agree to proceed to his ordina* 
tioj , h iving satisfied themselves of his qualifications, and 
recommendations for the office of a christian Minister. 

JOSEPH BARKER, Moderator. 

WILLIAM BENTLEY, Scribe." 

Now candid reader, the next, thing with which we 
present you, is a report of the opposers' committee, 
which they made to their party, and which we believe 
was communicated to the Clergy accessible by them, far 
and near, and as far as possible to prejudice the minds 
of the public. 

An unexpected and strange occurrence threw the 
committee's report into our hands. The object of this 
report will be decided by the reader. 

After having laid before the reader that strange unac- 
countable report, we will shew what effect it produced. 

Here follows the report with some explanatory notes. 

"The committee appointed to represent that part of the 
church and coiigregation in the North Parish in Hing- 
kam which was opposed to the settlement of Mr. Joseph 
Richardson as a gospel minister in that place, have at- 
tended the disagreeable and arduous service assigned 
them, and submit the following report, 

" AGREEABLY to their instructions your committee 
collected a number of documents, and evidences in sup- 
port of the charges which had been alledged against Mr, 
Richardson, and made such arrangements as the short 
time* allowed them would permit. 

To the First Church of Christ in Hingkam. 
Beloved. 
1 hereby certify, that Mr. Joseph Richardson is a member of the Church of 
Ckr st at Dartmouth College ; and that lie is in regular and good standing. At his 
request (as you have given him a call to settle with you as your pastor and teacher), he 
is sincerely recommended to your christian care, fellowship, and communion. When 
he shall be received as a member of your body, his particular relation to this Church 
will cease. JOHN SMITH, Pastor of said Church 

at Dartmouth College. 
* It is surprizing that such gentlemen as composed the opposers' committee, six of 
whom have the honor of a collegiate education, should complain for want of time to 
make arrangements, when with the greatest possible diligence they had been employed 
nine or ten months in gathering all they could find from every quarter against Mr. 
R j c ha st.. son. These gentlemen had been called upon more than four months prior to 
rlination of Mr. R. to support their cause at Ckarlestown before a reference. They 



29 

"On Monday, 30th June, they met a council which had 
been invited to assemble by the aggrieved Members of 
the Church, and laid before them a statement of the pro- 
ceedings of the Parish, the Church, and the opposition, 
from the time Mr. Richardson first came among us. On 
Tuesday, July 1, they appeared at Mr. Fearing' s Tav- 
ern, at the hour appointed, but the ordaining Council 
not having convened, they retired on being assured by 
Mr. Fearing that they should be notified as soon as the 
Council should be assembled and ready to proceed. At 
5 o'clock, P. M. a billet signed by Joseph Richardson was 
received by Gen. Lincoln, informing him that the 
Council were assembled and were ready to hear any 
evidence in support of the allegations contained in the 
protest signed by himself and others, and that an im- 
mediate attendance was requested. Your Committee 
immediately repaired to Mr. Fearing's, where they 
found the room, in which the Council were assembled, 
guarded by a Constable* with his staff and an assistant 
with a cane, and after being interrogated whether they 
were a Committee in behalf of the opposition, were ad- 
mitted to the Council, who had previously organized 
themselves ; and were surrounded by the Committee of 
the Parish and that part of the Church who were adher- 
ents of Mr. Richardson. The Council consisted of a 
deputation from four churches only, among whom were 
but three clergymen : Rev. Mr. Barker of Middleboro\ 
Moderator : Rev, Mr Bentley, of Salem., Scribe ; Rev. 
Mr. Briggs of Plympto?i, with one delegate each, and two 
delegates from the Church at Tewksbury, one of whom 
was father in law to Mr. Richardson.! It appeared 

had knowledge of all the arrangements for the ordination some weeks before it took 
place, and they were particularly notified by letter a number of days previous. 

Their witnesses also or those who were reported authors of the accusations, all who 
could be known, were notified by letters many days previous to the convening of the 
Council, and most of them lived within twenty miles of Hinghdm. Yet the committee 
had not time to make arrangements ! 

* Is it uncommon onsuch occasions for constables or other persons to preserve or- 
der and prevent crowds interrupting the proceedings ? If not, let no more be said up- 
on this point, for it seems the committee were readily admitted 

t Was f at an extraordinary thing ? Are there not numerous instances in which Fath- 
ers and Brothers and the nearest friends are called upon Councils ? 



loin subsequent observations that the Council had, pre- 
vious to the attendance of your Committee, heard such 
statements as Mr. Richardson, and his adherents, had 
thought proper to make ; and that they proceeded un- 
der the impression that the opposition were not consid- 
ered a part of the society, and contributed nothing to- 
wards the support of Parish expenses, which was not a 
fact*. 

Also that they intended not to admit any allegations 
in addition to those contained in the protest alluded to 
in Mr. Richardson's billet. The Committee after ex- 
hibiting their credentials, presented a written request to 
the council, that the question which was submitted to 
their decision should be discussed in the meeting-house, 
that all persons who felt interested might have an oppor- 
tunity of hearing and judging for themselves. In sup- 
port of this request it was urged that if the business was 
conducted in private, appearances would be suspicious, 
and the result unsatisfactory, and that the most effectual 
way for Mr. Richardson to vindicate his character, and 
place it in a fair light to the world, if he was really in- 
nocent, was to have it publicly investigated. That on 
the other hand the characters of Mr. Richardson's oppo- 
sers were implicated, they having been accused of fabri- 
cating the charges against him|, and therefore they were 
in justice entitled to the privilege of at least proving their 

iwn innocence in a public manner. All arguments how- 
ever were unavailing. Mr. Bentlry, who assumed and 
exercised throughout the whole discussion the right of 
determining for the council on every question, strongly 
objected for two reasons. One that it would take too 
much time. The other that the council were convened 
at the request of the Church and Parish, that the Parish 

* It is easy to detect this error. Some of the opposcrs, though not all, were liable 
to pay for the support of the Minister of the Parish the then present year, but ihey had 
virtually an exemption of the Parish afterward, by the vote of separation and other ar- 
errients. The opposcrs had no reason to fear but that they should obtain a sepa- 
rate Parish unless they compelled the old Parish to oppose their beirg formed into a 
separate society, as circumstances might be so altered as to justify such a measure. 

f No such charge was brought forward against the opposcrs ; but the reader will 
see in the sequel how nearly such a charge migl t have come to the truth. 



31 

had appointed a committee to conduct and direct the pro 
ceedings, that the council had examined and found the 
proceedings regular, and had approved thereof, and by 
their approbation had bound themselves to adhere to the 
regulation of said committee ; that therefore the council 
had in fact determined the hearing should be in the 
place in which they were then assembled — they were 
not at liberty to sit elsewhere. He said that the Parish 
at large were satisfied, and did not wish to be hearers ; 
but if the opposers of Mr. Richardson wished to trans- 
gress the rules of order and regularity, and the vote of 
the Parish, he was willing they should be admitted ; 
there are but few of them, said he, addressing himself to 
the council, and the adherents of Mr. Richardson, let 
them come in. Then turning to the committee observ- 
ed, he thought this a great condescension in the Council, 
and an evidence that they had no wish to exclude any 
who- had an inclination to hear the discussion. 

Notwithstanding this boasted liberality of Mr. Bentley, 
care was taken not to give instructions to the constable 
stationed at the door to carry it into effect*. The re- 
quest to sit in the meeting-house being refused, it was 
stated by the committee, that in consequence of the un- 
happy division in the Parish and the appointment of the 
ordination, the opposers not fully relying on their own 
judgment had thought it expedient to solicit the advice 
of an ecclesiastical council in respect to the conduct they 
ought to pursue on this occasion : that they had accord- 
ingly invited Rev. Dr. Reed of Bridgwater — Rev, Mr. 
Harris of Dorchester — -Rev. Mr. Allyn of Duxbury — 
Rev. Mr. Porter of Roxbury, with their delegates : that 
they were then in session and that to be able to form a 
correct opinion, and advise understanding^, they con 
ceived it necessary they should be made acquainted With 
all the facts on both sides of the question, and requested 
they might be admitted for that purpose. 
Mr. JBentley said he thought this a very extraordina- 

* Much of the above statement denotes a treacherous memory or a bad stenographer, 

and is materially incori i 



32 

vy request— he had no notion of having a jury upon 
their conduct. There were many wonderful events 
taking place in this day of wonders ; but he thought 
this one of the most wonderful. O, said he, you 
must ask for something mjre reasonable than that. 
After this a request was made that the before named 
gentlemen should be admitted to hear in the capacity of 
private clergymen. This oeing objected to hy the Par- 
ish Committee, was consequently not granted by the 
Council, although some of the clergymen some time af- 
ter applied personally for admission.* These requests 
being rejected 'with contempt, your committee, after 
having reai a statement of the proceedings of the Par- 
ish, the Church and the opposition, proceeded to state 
their objections to Mr. Richardson's ordination, but they 
soon found that they were before a tribunal under the 
entire controul of Mr. Bentlsy, who had apparently 
predetermined to disregard every objection, and who 
descended from the sacred office of a judge, in a cause 
of such magnitude and solemnity to take the part of an 
attorney for the defendant with ail the zeal of an inter- 
ested partizan.f To every allegation and evidence 
which was exhibited, he would apply some artful insin- 
uation, sneer or contemptuous observation intended to 
destroy its force and prejudice the minds of the Council. 
The Committee easily foresaw from the conduct of 
the Council, what would be their final decision ere 
they had fairly entered on the merits of the question .; 

* This could not prevent the opposers' committee proceeding and being heard, nor 
did it prevent their witnesses. 

No care was taken about the business, excepting to prevent an ex-parte council being 
intruded. The Council and the Church and Parish committees were of one accord de- 
termined there should be no ex-parte council or jury upon their conduct, and ' appear- 
ances being suspicious' respecting the Rev. gentlemen or" the ex-parte council,' they 
were solely on this account not admitted. 

Though they applied for admission in a private capacity, after what Had already pass- 
ed, they were suspected to be spies pursuing the same object as when an ex-pafte coun- 
cil in a body. 

t liec^use it appeared to be (lie object of the opposers' committee to impose npon 
the council and to induce them to adopt irregular proceedings, and Rev. Mr. Bent- 
lev plainly and candidly remarked upon the impropriet y ?,f.snch measures, the com- 
exclaim against him and shamefully attempt en abuse him. Rev. Mr. Kent- 
ley's character for integrity cannot suffer nrach irom such aspersions. 



but a sense of duty impelled them to proceed though 
under the most discouraging circumstances*. 

The Committee objected to Mr. Richardson's ordina- 
tion for two general reasons!- 

1st. Because they considered the manner of his call 
and his acceptance irregular and unprecedented*. 

2d. Because they believed him an unsuitable person 
in point of moral character to be' employed in the gos- 
pel ministry.^ 

In support of the first objection it was shewn, that the 
Parish, at a meeting December 10th, 1805, voted to 
give Mr. Richardson a call without consulting the Church 
or even communicating to them the result of their meet- 
ing.!! That on the 9th January, 1 806, a meeting of the 
Church was holden, when it was voted to nonconcur 
the doings of the Parish in the call of Mr. Richardson 
and protest against the same.^f That Mr. Richardson's 
answer of acceptance, dated Jan. 6tli, 1806, was read the 
19th of the same month.** That on the 8th of June fol- 
lowing, eight males, all adherents of Mr. Richardson, and 
a number of females were admitted into the Church, by 
Mr. Bentley, thereby giving a decided majority in that 
body, in favor of Mr. Richardson!! — That at a meeting 

* It seems they were c; under discouraging circumstances.' Must not this have a- 
risen from the confusion and inconsistency in which their affairs Vv T ere involved ? 

t What had Mr. R's opposers now to do with his ordination, when they were vot- 
ed off by the Parish at their own request, had not for a long time attended upon his 
ministry, but held worship separately and were building another meeting-house? Thev 
but just now informed us that they came forward to vindicate their own innocence. — 
Why did they not say we offered the following evidence to vindicate our innocence ? 
. i What had the opposers then to do with the manner of his call and acceptance, 
while the Church and Society and Mr. R. were satisfied ? The call and acceptance 
were found to be regular and the Council approved them. 

§ Would riot their conduct have appeared much more consistent if they had said 
nothing about their objections to his ordination, but only exhibited their evidence 
which induced them to alledge such charges against Mr. R ? But not satisfied with this, 
they must do their utmost to break up the Parish, and ruin their Candidate. 

Ij Who but the Church had any reason to complain ? and how is it material who 
called first ? 

5 It has been already shewn that there was no regular meeting of the Church on the 
9th of January, 1806. This can be proved by substantial evidence, and that a call 
had been presented to Mr. R. signed by a majority of the members of the Church, 
previous to his giving his answer, 

_** A call of the Church had been presented Mr. Richardson by an add 
taining the signatures of a majority. 

ft It has been shown that the candidates for admission into the Church had hceft 
propounded the usual length of time and no objections had been offered against th 
And here it may be" added that there had ever been a dt ' : - : - 
previous to this addition. 

E 



34 

i ui j line, it was voted to concur in 
rbe call of the Parish" given Dec. 10th, 1805f; andat 
a subsequent Parish meeting, holden 28th of June, a vote 
passed to concur with the Church in their last mention- 
ed vote of concurrence with the Parish, and that to this 
call of the Church and Parish, if it may be so denomin- 
ated, Mr. Richardson had never given an answer J. Mr. 
Richardson said he was ready to give one then. Much 
desultory conversation took place on this question of ir- 
regularity, in which Mr. Bentley took his side. 

He endeavored in an artful manner, to draw the com- 
mittee into an acknowledgement that the proceedings of 
the opposition, as it re&pected Church meetings, had been, 
irregular, intending thereby to destroy the force of their 
objections against the irregular proceedings of the Par- 
ish ; and intimated, though he did not undertake to as- 
sert, that though the Parish had not in some instances 
been perfectly regular in the beginning, they had since 
corrected their proceedings, and set themselves right. — 
Among many other tilings equally incorrect, and irrele- 
vant to the subject, he said he should consider the call 
and answer perfectly regular, if the opposers had not 
been consulted, as they had petitioned for a separation, 
and obtained the consent of the Parish for that purpose ; 
and were exempted from the burden of Parish expens- 
es§. This kind of sophistry had its effect on the minds 
of the Council. The committee having clearly proved, 
as they believe, the propriety of this objection, proceed- 
ed to the second, that Mr. Richardson was an unsuitable 
man in point of moral character to be employed in the 
gospel ministry. A number of charges of a more specif- 
ic nature were contained under this head. 

1st. That Mr. Richardson had been guilty of violating 



+ This is incorrect, here follows the vote verbatim : " Voted to renew our concur- 
ish, wl ich was before done by signatures in the call of Mr Joseph 
i I M inister, by the Parish on the 9th of December, 1805." 
tory answers had been given to the Church and Parish. Mr. R's answer 
written till he rec- ived the call of the Church. The answer was confirmed at 
inatioiH Why should, the opposers cooiplain ? 
1 Whether the terms " equally incorrect and irrelevant," will apply with more 
in t( the reporters, jLhe reader will judge. 



as 

one of the most solemn contracts in social lifell, for wl 
he stands condemned in a court of justice. 

2d. That he had been guilty of base ingratitude, and 
created much disturbance by divulging and misrepre- 
senting a confidential communication made to him at his 
request* hy one who had patronized him, and condu 
ed towards him in the most friendly manner. 

|| Here is a piece of high colouring about I\Ir. R's ha courted a 

chusing to marry her. The people of Hingham know with- what grace a no nib 
the committee appeared in making this objection. 

All the difference between this, and innumerable similar instances is, this was pro- 
secuted in law,. 

It was acivilandnot a criminal action in the eye of the law. — Writes Dr. Cum-incs 
in one of his letters, ' : I am fully persuaded, that had the affair never been. prosecut- 
e/Lin law, it would soon have been buried in obli of his ai 
qnair.tance, among the venial imprudences of inexperienced youth, which dp not es- 
sentially affect character." 

* What ! " a confidential communication made to lam at his request'' ' ? '■ 
seem likely that Mr. R. requested Dr. Morse to make a confidential communication ! 
Is Dr Morse so weak a truui as to be induced by Mr. IV*. request, to : 
presentfatives of the Town of Charlestown were grossly immoral, bad men 
and uninformed ? Or is Dr. Morse so wicked as to report icl thi :; ■- " 

were true ? These injured gentlemen had discovered, as they were Yi * - 

School taught by Mr. R, thathis{Mr. R'sJ conduct toward them was cbangei 
one of the gentlemen demanded an explanation, which was given v. ith reluctance, i 
such a man as Dr. Mor.sk to commit such things in confidence betrays guilt. 

Why should not Dr. Morse openly caution a yowng man against bad cor 
Mr. Bridge, one of the gentlemen injured by Dr. Morse, does not deny : 
implication acknowledges that the Doctor made concessions to birn for t) e wroi \ 
If there were less secrecy in similar cases there would be more justice, Mr. R. statt 
the affair respecting Dr. Morse, as follows : 

" Respecting the charge of a breach of the confidence of Dr. Morse, I positively af 
firm the following to be a true statement of th : affai •. 

Bei:;^ employed as an instructor of the 
pursued my theological studies under the direction of Dr. Morse, f r whose attei 
I ./as to return assistance by preaching for him occasionally Soon after my first a< - 
qruaintance with the Dr. I heard him speak disrespectfully of those Trustees who eiiir 
ployed me in the school. I at first paid but little regard to it ; but as the si. i j'ect 
frequently brought into view, it began to make some impression. 

I had entertained a high respect for the Trustees and had occasional! ' v isited a( the 
houses of several of them ; but for the following reason my conduct i- \ w;. ■ 

changed. As I was one day receiving the attention of Dr. Mo us ■: in hi » tu 
accosted me in a monitory manner for vi iting several families and associating with 
them; for he said they were unfriendly to him, that he did not visit them, and st ted 
reasons for my considering l heir society as dangerous and disgraceful. Tins alarmed 
me, and, I, in some measure, changed my conduct toward them. 

As the celebration ot Independence at Charlesiozvu was approachii g, I received an in- 
vitation to officiate as chaplain for the Republicans; I had no hesitation about com- 
plying with their invitation, but in one respect. I doubted whether there was a pro- 
priety in it, as 1 was a stranger and had but if tJ perience in my profession. 

I therefore called upon Dr. Morse and 3sked lorn wh< ther tl ere were any 
priety in my perl : duties of chaplain on that occasion. He readily rep! 

that he could conceivi of no impropriety in ting rs chaplain ; but added, 

were you to ask my ad • liency of your attac! 

yeufself to the Republic; > do it. 

I Qpsesved, respecting thai point, ' a .1 wish to I 

pinion ffiven. 



36 

3d. That he had avowed a principle inconsistent with 
the peace and happiness of civil society, viz, that if e~ 
ven in a confidential manner an opinion were given in 
his presence unfavorable to an absent person, he always 
considered himself at liberty to divulge itf . 

4th. That independently of the foregoing instances, 
he had been guilty of deception, prevarication and false- 
hood! 

5th. That he had by his improper speeches and con- 
duct manifested an unguarded, petulent and quarrel- 
some disposition. 

6th. That he had by his acceptance, and residence 
here in an irregular and unprecedented manner, made 
himself an instrument to destroy the peace of this Par^ 
ish and the happiness of individuals ; and although these 
consequences were long since well known to him, he has 
manifested a determination still to remain here. 

Dr. Morse urged the subject and inquired of me, whether the Trustees of the 
school and several other gentlemen would probably attend. I replied, I had been in- 
formed they would attend. 

Dr. Morse said, that people of good character and respectability \n Charts town be- 
longed to the Federal party. I mentioned several gentlemen, as exceptions to his re- 
mark. The Dr. repeated what he had several times said before, respecting two of the 
Trustees, " That they were immoral, irreligious, profane, bad men," and that some 
Others whom I mentioned were" weak and uninformed." I observed that I was of 
a different opinion upon these matters, and took leave of him. 

These remarks of Dr. Morss occasioned much reserve in my conduct toward those 
gentlemen; till I accidentally fell m company with one of them, who, in the course of 
conversation, mentioned the subject and insisted upon an explanation. 

After some solicitation, I reluctantly, though constrained by a sense of duty, related 
to the gentleman what Dr. Morse had said respecting him and some others, which 
had oe<- isioned a reserve in my conduct toward them. I never had the least idea that 
what Dr. Mouse said respecting those gentlemen was designed as a confidential com- 
munication for wished to be kept in confidence) as I had heard him make the s'ame 
declarations at different times and places, and in the. presence of different persons, as if 
he were asserting thing's of common notoriety 

Let it be remembered that I never asked Dr. Morse to give me the character of 
;ent]emen, nor his opinion respecting the propriety of being a Republican. 

'! he foregoing statement of tacts is true and correct according to the best of my re- 
collection." 

t The reader is referred to the account of the 3d, 4th, 5th and 6fh charges, contain- 
ed in a Letter written by the Rev. Mr. Norton, which will lollow this report. It 
dh ss to ( o'mment upon them now. The main point is to sec how well support- 
ed i' : e 1 ' srg< s are found. It is one thing to draw up charges, but another to prove 
them. These charges are all denied, and are declared to be without just foundation. 

Probably the 5th charge is principally founded on the affair of Capt, Nicholson 
and his son. of Charh rtoivn, going into Mr. R's school and beating him with clubs, in 
.; manner as that the S. J Court adjudged them to pay Mr. R. three hundred and 
fifty dollars for the injury and insult done him. 

+ Undoubtedly many deceptions, prevarications and falshoods, similar to "the 
fou going insta.nceg," might be equally well proved if, " vi% do believe" be evidences 



37 . * 

In support of the first, the committee in addition to 
the judgment of court, produced a deposition, which 
was not exhibited on the trial, from the Rev. Mr. Bar- 
ton of Fitchburg, testifying to the fact. And also two 
letters to Mr. Richardson from Miss Robinson, the lady 
who prosecuted him for a breach of promise of marriage, 
written after the receipt of his letter to her, by which he 
broke off the connection between them after five years 
courtship ; but before the prosecution was commenced 
or contemplated. These letters bear internal marks of 
authenticity, and were sworn by her to be correct cop- 
ies to the best of her recollection§>. In the first of these 
she intreats him in the feeling language of injured inno- 
cence to give her some explanation of his strange and 
unexpected conduct. In the other (he having taken no 
notice of the first) she reviews his conduct tow 7 ard her, 
and recapitulates his solemn promises, oaths and impre- 
cations. The evidence contained in these letters of the 
truth of the accusation against Mr. Richardson, and the 
collateral evidence in support of it, were, in the opinion 
of the committee, so explicit and conclusive, that it could 
be resisted by nothing but the most hardened prejudice^ 
or determined blindness!!. Even Mr. Bentley himself 
seemed for a moment to be convinced of its truth ; but 
justified Mr. Richardson's denial on ground that as Mr, 
Richardson had appealed from the judgment of the in- 
ferior court, had thrown himself on God and his coun- 
try, and the cause was then pending he had a right to 
plead not guilty, and such a plea under such circumstanc- 
es, was never considered a falsehood. And further said 
he thought it very extraordinary that a case which was 
pending in a court of justice should be brought before 
that Council to be prejudged by them. The committee 
would here remark, that if such reasoning be admitted as 



§ This is an extraordinary kind of evidence as ever was used to prove a person 
guilty. Copies of letters sworn to as correct, taken, not from originals nor from cop- 
ies, but from recollection, a number of years after they had been seen by the party so 
much self-interested. If such letters could be lugsl or credible evidence the learned 
reporters have knowledge of laws not generally known. 

|| " Prejudice or determined blindness." A high charge ! Whether it be the result c-f 
candor, or whether .substantiated, the reader will judge. 



38 

correct, the consequences which will follow are incalcu- 
lable. The indictment of a man for crimes of ever so 
heinous a nature must form no objection to his being in- 
troduced into the gospel ministry, lest the court before 
whom the criminal should be tried, might possibly be in- 
fluenced by the opinion of an ordaining council^ Dr. 
Morse's evidence being necessary to prove the truth of 
the second accusation, and he not having arrived, it was 
accordingly postponed.il At this stage of the business, 
it being about 10 o'clock, the Council adjourned, and 
met again the next morning at about 7, when the third 
charge was brought forward and supported by the testi- 
mony of Mr. Hoar, and was not denied by Mr. Richard-' 
sox. e i! In support of the fourth, a number of circumstan^ 
ces were mentioned, which the committee believe went 
to substantiate the accusation.* But the most striking 
instance which was produced, was a statement made in 
writing to the Parish at their meeting, Dec. 10, 1805. 
Mr. Richardson's letter of defence (as it is called) which 
was read at that meeting, was called for by the commit- 
tee, and an extract relative to his leaving the boarding 
house of Mr. Adams, in Chariest own., was read by the 
Council. Mr. Richardson therein stated, that the day 
after he left Mr. Adams', he called there on some busi- 
ness, thatMi\ADAMsthenexpressedhisregretthatMr.Rrc^ 
ardson had left him, and said the young gentlemen who 
boarded with him were also sorry for what had happen- 
ed, and wishedhimto returnand overlook all that had taken 
place, that he did not return because he had engaged 
other lodgings. A deposition was produced from Mr. 
Adams, testifying that he never made any declaration of 

Rev. Mr. Bi'ST r, f. v never objected against looking into the case, but only main- 
tained that in law, pleading not guilty, though judgment was given against the defend- 
ant, is not proof of falsehood. Though, as lias been remarked, the case was consider- 
ed in law a civil and not a criminal action, yet the reporters would represent it as a 
:rimc of the first magnitude. 

H All the charg :s, the reporters say were " completely substantiated " How th-eir 
.•give ! Dr. Morse's evidence never was exhibited. 

third charge was not supported by Mr. Hoar, nor was it confessed by Mr. 

Richardson. Mr. Hoar and Mr R. cheerfully agreed in their conference upon the 

subject before the Council. Their conversation can be stated should it be reqiiix .1. 

. e believe" ! Had the ground of the belief been exhibited, would 

•;■■• tj the reader ? 



39 

the kind, but on the contrary that he believed nothing 
but the most ample acknowledgements on the part of Mr. 
Richardson would have satisfied those gentlemen, and 
that his return without such acknowledgements, would 
have been the signal for them to leave the house.f An 
affray which took place between Mr. Richardson and a 
gentleman in Charlestown, and several other facts, were 
adduced in support of the fifth charge.J Mr. Adams 
from Act o/i, asserted, that he was in company with Mr. 
Richardson at Co/word, a few months before he came to 
preach in this town, that Mr. Richardson then said some- 
thing to this effect, that " he had quitted preaching be- 
cause he despised the clergy and the profession, and ap- 
peared to wish the company to understand that he was 
ashamed of ever having had any connexion with the 
clerical order." Mr. Richardson said he did not recol- 
lect ever to have seen Mr. Adams before and wished him 
to state the place and circumstances when this declara- 
tion w T as made. Mr. Adams accordingly stated the place 
and circumstances and persons present, all w T hich Mr. 
Richardson remembered ; but said it was anew charge, 
which he was not prepared to answer, but had he known 
it in season, he could have produced the persons who 
were present.^ 

The sixth charge was considered self evident, and 
needed no proof. The committee having gone through 

+ Here a deposition is brought forward in opposition to Mr. R's account of a tran- 
saction. But Mr. R. had no notice of the taking of the deposition, nor had he the least 
warning that such a charge was to be brought against him. Make the most of it and 
one man's word stands opposed to anothers. Is this charge *' completely substan- 
tiated ?" 

if What the reporters here say must be implicitly believed, as they have advanced so 
far in the report with wonderful correctness. 

k The reporters account of Mr. Adams's evidence is materially incorrect, But we 
submit to the reader Mr. Restatement relating to the 

" I hereby certify, that I have no recollection of ever having made the declaration al- 
ledged against me by a young Mr. Adams of Acton. I do now. and ever have, from 
my childhood, entertained the highest respect and veneration for the profession oi a 
christian minister ; nor have the most embarrassing circumstances ever abated my at- 
tachment to it, or prevented my pursuing the calling. I sincerely regret that my con- 
duct or conversation should ever have been misconstrued into any kind of disrespect 
religion. 

However, though I have no recollection of it. yet I tl bable that 1 

may have expressed myself in language which, by a misun< . of Mr. Adamj 

led him to state wi fore the Council/' 



40 

all the specific charges, except that which required the 
testimony of Dr. Morse, who was momently expected. 
One of the Council observed, that Mr. Bridge was pre- 
sent and could give all the information on that subject 
that was necessary. Mr. Bridge then made a statement 
to this effect, that some time previous to the difficulty 
with Dr. Morse, Mr. Richardson and himself were ac~ 
cidently in company with each other when no person 
was present : that some conversation took place, which 
led Mr. Richardson to say apparently without any ma- 
licious intention and rather inadvertently, that he knew 
certain persons in Charlestown were not perfectly friend- 
ly to Mr. Bridge. And on his asking him to what he 
alluded, Mr. Richardson after some hesitation told him, 
that he had been advised hy Dr. Morse to avoid the com- 
pany of Mr. Bridge and others and their families, and 
to seek that of some other persons whom he named : — 
that he (Mr. Bridge) feeling much injured, required an 
explanation of Dr. Morse, which was given him by the 
Dr. — Mr. Richardson then asked Mr. Bridge in presence 
of the Council, if Dr. Morse had not made some conces- 
sions to him. Mr. Bridge wished to be excused from 
answering any such questions as the Doctor and himself 
were on friendly terms, and wished nothing should be 
said which might in any degree interrupt their friend- 
ship. The Committee, considering this to be an ex-parte 
and inconclusive evidence, wished that Dr. Morse might 
be heard. 

The Council said as Dr. Morse had not arrived, and 
as there were no other evidences to be given, they wish- 
ed to be a few minutes by themselves-! The Commit- 
tee observed they hoped the Council would not adjourn, 

they had many observations to make as well as Dr. 
Morse's evidence to exhibit. The Council replied that 
they had not adjourned ; but as they had been a consid- 
erable time in session, and felt somewhat exhausted, 
they wished to have a little respite just to take breath ; 

t The Council particularly and repeatedly asked the opposers' committee whether 
they had any thing more to offer or any other charges to bring forwardj to which tbc 
same committee replied, that they had nothing more to offer. 



41 

intimating at the same time that the committee should 
be heard further.* All present except the Council accord- 
ingly retired.-— After the committee had waited some 
time, they began to suspect that there might possibly bo 
a misunderstanding between them and the Council with 
regard to their being heard further,]'" or that the Council 
had determined to hear nothing more ; and handed in 
a written request that the ordination might be postponed 
■until the fate of the petition for a separation should be 
known.J Immediately after this a letter was received 
from the Council of the opposition, containing their ad- 
vice, another Written request founded on this advice 
was sent to the Council, viz. that the ordination might 
be postponed until a mutual Council should be called to 
investigate the whole subject, and determine on the ex- 
pediency of Mr. Richardson's settlement in this place. 
To neither of these did the Council return any answer, 
and in a short time it was proclaimed that the Council 
would be in the meeting-house at half past 12 o'clock. 
Thus the Committee were unexpectedly, and as they 
conceive unfairly debarred from a privilege which they 
understood had been implicitly promised them of sup- 
porting one of their most important charges, and mak- 
ing such observations on the whole subject as they deem- 
ed pertinent to the occasion.!! They believed the busi- 
ness not closed not only from observations of the Coun- 
cil previous to their leaving the room ; but from the cir- 
cumstances of Mr. Richardson's not having made his de- 
fence^ and the papers which they held as evidences not 
having been called for by the Council ; who appeared 



* The Council did not suggest a wish to interrupt or prevent the proceedings of 
theopposers' committee. All their papers were read, and all they could say was 
heard. 

t " Being heard further." Why should they expect a further hearing, wken they 
had made the declaration they had nothing further to exhibit ? 

^ The Council had much encouragement to shew the favour of postponing the Or- 
dination, considering the conduct of those opposes in creating ail possible disturbance 
and difficulty after they were generously voted off by the Parish ! 

|j After having had a patient hearing for a great part of two days, and after havrfig 
mide the declai-ation that they had nothing further to exhibit, we are not a little sur- 
prized that they should complain of being debarred the privilege of a further hear: tg. 

§ The Council refused to hear Mr. Richardson's defence, they we rs well satis- 
fied without it. 

F 



44 

edge, were produced to the Council which invalidated 
a single fact. 

The moderator of the Council, though he was careful 
to inform the Congregation when assembled in the 
meeting house, that the Council had found nothing a- 
gainst Mr. Richardson, to disqualify him for a Gospel 
Minister, was equally careful to avoid saying, that the 
allegations brought forward by the opposition were un- 
supported.! 

The Committee therefore, after the opportunity they 
have hacl to make themselves acquainted with the facts 
relative to the subject, are irresistibly led to the conclu- 
sion, and feel it their duty to declare their belief, that 
these charges were entirely disregarded, and that Mr. 
Richardson was ordained by a partial Council, selected 
for party purposes and wholly under the influence of 
party considerations ; and that the whole transaction is 
without a parallel in the Ecclesiastical history of New- 
Engla/id.f. 

B. LINCOLN, 
NATHAN RICE, 
SAMUEL NORTON, 
THOMAS LORING, } Committee. 

LEVI LINCOLN, Jun. 
ROBERT THAXTER, 
JEROM CUSHING, 
A true copy from the original. 

H. Thaxter. 
P. S. Abner Lincoln, Esq. Dea. William Cushing, 
Ebenezer Gay, Esq. and Mr. Caleb Thaxter, were of 
said Committee,!! but from necessity were prevented 
attending, 

+ The Moderator's declaration, ".That the Council found nothingagainst Mr. Rich- 
ardson to disqualify him for a gospel Minister" fairly implies, " that the allegations 
brought forward by the opposition were unsupported," or that whatever evidence 
they exhibited had little or no weight on the minds of the Council. 

t We here would only ask, is the candor of these concluding remarks designed for 
imitation ! \ ! 

But let the reader after critically perusing the preceding report and all the documents 
itl this painphlec, draw up his own " belief." 

It is of vat>t importance to ourselves and others when we form any conclusion rej* 
pecung matters of weight, that it be founded in truth. 

[| " Let him .that is without sin cast the first stone." 



45 
... •'» 

Having briefly noticed some of the principal errors; 
and incorrect statements in the opposers' report, which 
could not have been so authentically detected by any as 
by those who were witnesses to events as they passed, 
we are happy to introduce the reader to a highly inter- 
esting reply made to the same report by Rev. Mr. Nor- 
ton of Weymouth. 

This reply can not be attributed to political partiality, 
to a prepossession of personal acquaintance or to any 
suspicious motive whatever. Whoever knows the char- 
acter of this gentlemen knows there is no man 'more re- 
mote or aloof from the influence of sinister motives. 

These circumstances give irresistible weight to his 
judgment. 

The letter requesting permission to publish Rev. Mr. 
Norto 5 s Letter and his answer are here submitted. 

Uingham, Sept. 23, 1807. 
Rev. Sir, 

Having obtained the favor of perusing a letter ad- 
dressed by you to Col. Nathan Rice, dated Weymouth, 
August 11, 1806, which is interesting ; and as we view 
Jt, a candid and able review of the late controversy con- 
concerning the settlement of Mr. Richardson as the Min- 
ister of the first Parish in Hingham ) We hereby request 
your permission that we may publish it to the world. 

Sir, we are pursuaded your inviolable attachment to 
the cause of truth and rectitude will incline you to com- 
ply with our request, and to obey the call, as we be- 
lieve, of duty. 

To grant this request, will be, in our opinion, to con- 
fer an important favor upon the public, and will increase 
the obligations of yours, 

With unfeigned affection and respect, 

JACOB LEAVITT, 1 In ht;ha >f°f th f Commits 

SETH LINCOLN, appqznted by the Pgsk to 

SOLOMON JONES, l coUect ^cuments, £ff , rel- 

JEDEDIAH LINCOLN, (atroe tothe latecontro-ver- 

JOTHAM LINCOLN, #. sy ™>™ r ™ n i J he ***** 
' J mcnt of Mr. Richardson. 

Rev. J. Norton. 



46 

Weymouth, Sept. 29, 1807. 
Gentlemen, 
I have received your note of 23d inst. in which you 
request permission to publish a letter which I addressed 
to Col. Nathan Rice, bearing date August 1 1, 1806, on 
the subject you mention. — As the letter was written, not 
for public inspection, but with a view to satisfy what I 
believed might reasonably be deemed a just claim of 
several gentlemen in Hingham, I have doubted the pro- 
priety oi its publication " to the world" ; but, apprised 
that several copies of it are in circulation, some of which 
it is believed, are very considerably incorrect ; and ear- 
nestly desirous that it may be instrumental to the devel- 
opement of truth, independent of party views or local 
considerations, I feel constrained, although with a degree 
of reluctance, to consent to its publication. 

Fervently wishing that " the cause of truth and recti- 
tude" may be supported, whether it contribute to the 
brightening, or to the obscurity of your affairs, 
I am, gentlemen, your's, &c. 

JACOB NORTON. 
Messrs. Jacob Leavitt, 
Seth Lincoln, 
Solomon Joses, 
Jedediah Lincoln, 
Jotham Lincoln, jun. 

Weymouth, August, 11, 1806. 
Dear Sir, 
Such has been your intercourse with the world, such 
your acqaintance with the human character, and such 
your knowledge of the revolution of events, and of their 
influence on the feelings, judgment, decisions and pur- 
suits of nun, that you experience, it is presumed, little 
or no surprize in observing in others, or in finding in 
yourself, at different times, and under different circum- 
stances, a diversity of views, sentiments, determinations 
aud conduct, with respect to a variety of objects. Not 
only is man thus subject to change ; but thus to change, 
nut unfrequently, becomes his indispensable duty. 



47 

The late conversation which took place between us, on 
certain subjects of an interesting and important nature, 
in connection with several previous and subsequent e- 
vents has given rise to these reflections. Your senti- 
ments and feelings, as well as mine, have undergone,, 
since that time, it is not unlikely, more or less, an unex- 
pected revolution. Whether this observation, sir, will, 
with propriety, apply to yourself, I shall, however, haz- 
ard no peremptory decision ; but to the writer it applies 
with much pertinency and force. To be more explicit, 
I would observe, that several communications which you 
made at our late interview, respecting the gentleman 
newly ordained, and the situation of things, generally, in 
Hingham, led me strongly to suspect, that I had too pre- 
cipitately " made up my mind respecting them." They 
occasioned me very unpleasant sensations, and led me 
considerably to doubt the propriety of carrying into ef- 
fect an exchange of pulpit services with Mr. Richard- 
son, to which, at his request, I had previously consented. 
Certain written documents, which I soon after received, 
and as I apprehend from yourself, although through a~ 
nother medium, greatly added to my doubts, and pain- 
fully perplexed my mind. The result was a determina- 
tion, that if I had been precipitate in cc;ic/z/s?07i with re- 
spect to an affair of so much importance as that of minis- 
terial intercourse with a brother, I would not commit 
myself by precipitation in co7iduct, I deliberately resol- 
ved to suspend the interchange of prefessional services 
with Mr. Richardson, which had some days before been 
negociated, till I -should be satisfied that no reasonable 
objection, at least, in my own mind, would forbid it. 1 1 
accordingly wrote a billet to Mr. Richardson on Friday 
morning, the 8th inst. that my situation was such, as to 
make it desirable that our proposed exchange be post] 
ned ; and that he must place no dependance on it. 

The messenger, on his return, informed me that Mr. 
Richardson was not at his lodgings ; that he was gone 
t a considerable distance on a visit to his friends, a 
it was uncertain whether he would n 
ih. He accordingly returned the billet wi 



48 

seal unbroken. On the evening of the same day, docu- 
ments were, unsought for and unexpected, put into my 
hands by certain gentlemen from Hingham, Mr. Rich- 
ardson's adherents, accompanied with several verbal 
statements. — Upon these I bestowed that attention and 
gave them that weight to which I believed they had a 
reasonable claim. The result of which was a decided 
and conscientious belief, that I could not consistently 
with social or religious obligation decline, or even $m> 
pend the exchange of pulpit labors with Mr. Richard- 
son, which had been negociated between us. I accord- 
ingly gave a mental consent that the exchange should 
not be delayed, but by permission of providence, be car- 
ried into effect. A practical consent, you doubtless are 
acquainted has been the result. My conduct, sir, in this 
affair, while it has been accompanied, on my part, with 
unpleasant reflections and painful feelings, from a varie- 
ty of considerations, has resulted from a conviction, not 
only of its propriety, but of moral obligation. 

That this conviction has arisen from an unbiassed in 
vestigation and adequate view of facts, and evidence, I 
would by no means positively assert. I am not altogeth- 
er unapprised, I trust, of the deceitfulness and treachery 
of the human heart, and particularly of my own ; and of 
the strength and subtihty of its latent prejudices. This, 
however, I do not hesitate to say, that it has been my se- 
rious object to ascertain, with relation to the subject un- 
der review, what is truth ? what is duty ? and to act ac- 
cordingly. 

Permit me, Sir, respectfully to solicit your attention 
to the leading considerations, which have influenced my 
mind and directed my conduct in the case before us. — 
The first I shall mention is the result of Mr. Richardson's 
ordaining Council. 

This result, Sir, if I understand it, as I think I do, 
goes to represent Mr. Richardson's moral character as 
unexceptionably good, or at least, as free from all such 

mishes in their opinion, as would disqualify him for 
the Gospel y, and that his qualifications generally 

for that important and sacred trust, are desirably com- 



m 

petent. That an ecclesiastical Council deputed from 
four regular Christian Churches, the members of which 
Council, generally, at least, were strangers to Mr. Rich- 
ardson ; and of course were not likely to have been un- 
der any prepossessions either for, or against him ; and 
who were little, if at all acquainted with the situation 
of things in Hinghcim, before they arrived there for the 
purpose of transacting the business assigned them — that 
such a Council, should, after attending to the documents 
laid before them, by Mr. Richardson's opposers as well 
as adherents, have been unanimous in deciding and con- 
ducting as they did, had they believed that Mr. Rich- 
ardson was an unworthy and an unsuitable man to be in- 
ducted into the work of the Gospel Ministry, in the town 
of Hingham, is hardly credible. To me, (perhaps, how- 
ever, I express myself too strongly,) it is utterly incred- 
ible. I should probably have used expressions less con- 
fident, were it not that I am personally acquainted with 
several of the gentlemen, of whose integrity and upright- 
ness, I cannot but entertain a very high opinion. 

The second consideration, which iniiuenced my mind 
and directed my conduct, in relation to the case before 
us, was drawn from several documents testifying to the 
respectability of Mr. Richardson's character in a literary, 
social and religious view. From unquestionable author- 
ity it appears that Mr. Richardson, while an under-grad-* 
uate at College, was admitted a member of the P. B. K. 
society, and of the society of Amicorum Bocialium. Had 
he not been respectable as a scholar, and in the confi- 
dence of the members of those societies as a gentleman, 
possessed, of at least, the social virtues, it is presumable 
that he would not have been received into their respec- 
tive fraternities. From unquestionable authority, it dees, 
or maj appear that he made a public profession of the 
christian religion, and was admitted a member of the 
Church at Dartmouth College at an early period after; 
admission into that literary institution ; that he main- 
tained " a regular and .good standing" in that Church till 
the year 1802, when his particular religious connexion 
with it w T as dissolved ; and that he was recommended 
G 



50 

by the Pastor, ' professor Smith, '" to the christian care, 
fellowship and communion of any regular Church of 
Christ, wherever God in his providence might call him.*' 
It appears also from the testimony of Mr. Nathaniel 
Ruse, a candidate preacher, that he was a fellow stu* 
dent with Mr. Richabdson about two years, while fit- 
ting for College ; that he chambered with him during 
.their four years residence at College ; that they had fre- 
quently corresponded with, and visited each other since 
their graduation, and that Mr, Richardson " sustained a 
character distinguishedly remarkable for religion ; that 
he was so strictly moral, that he was generally consider- 
ed a little superstitious ; that he was likewise uncom- 
monly charitable to the poor, and liberal in contribu- 
tions of a public nature ; that in respect to his temper 
and disposition he ever considered him a man of a good 
disposition of soul ; of an open, generous and benevo- 
lent heart, and as a man of vital piety." 

It further appears from the testimony of the Andcver 
Association, of December 4th, 1803, that Mr. "Richard- 
son's moral character, theological studies and qualifica- 
tions" were such, in their estimation, as to entitle him 
to their patronage and " recommendation to the notice 
and employment of the Churches of Christ wherever 
God in his providence should call him." This associa- 
tion, it appears, was held in the neighborhood of the 
place where Mr. Richardson was born and brought up, 
and that he was introduced to the association by Dr. 
Cumings. It further appears from the recommendation 
of Mr. Richardson by Dr. Cumings to Dr. Morse, dated 
January 1804, that he considered him as possessing " a 
fair character ; as having the reputation of good morals 
from his youth up ; as being a man of a good disposi- 
tion, of promising talents, and as worthy of patronage." 
From a subsequent letter of the Dr's. dated September 
24th, 1805, it appears that Mr. Richardson taught a 
school in Billerica, after leaving College, to " universal 
acceptance"; and that after this, having pursued theolo- 
gical studies with him (the Doctor) about half a year, 
he left the town with a fair character, and the reputation 



51 

of good morals from his youth up." The Dr. subjoins, 
that before he left his family he never heard his conduct 
censured by any, except in the instance of a supposed 
violation of a promise of marriage to a young woman, 
to whom he had paid some particular attention. 

It further appears from a declaration, bearing date 
Aug. 16, 1805, of Messrs. D. Goodwin, T. Harris and 
M. Bridge, Trustees to an Academy in Charlestown, 
which, for some time, had been instructed by Mr. Rich- 
ardson, that they " found in him a very good school- 
master, and his character, in all other respects, as far as 
they had knowledge of him, that of an holies*;, mora!, 
good man." From a declaration of the selectmen oi 
Charlestown, of October 25, 1805, it appears, that injus- 
tice to Mr. Richardson they are " compelled to say, tuat 
as a gentleman, he is highly respectable, frank, open 
and sociable ; that in the capacity of an instructor he 
has given very general satisfaction, both to parents and 
children ; that as a moral and good man, they believe 
his character to be fair and exemplary, and that if any 
illiberal surmises or dishonorable charges have been hint- 
ed to his prejudice, they believe them to be wholly ground- 
less." In addition to these testimonials, it appears from 
certificates of Messrs. A. Adams and P. Nichols, gentle- 
men in Charlestown-, in whose families Mr. Richardson 
was, for a considerable time, a boarder, il that his con- 
duct towards them and their families, wa$s quiet and 
peaceable, and that it was at all times very civil and res- 
pectful, and such as gave them no reason to complain" 
In fine, from a testimony of Dec. 19, 1805, from Deacon 
Goodwin of Charlestown, who had been in habits of in- 
timacy with Mr. Richardson, it appesrs, that in his view 
Mr. Richardson's moral and religious character is distin- 
guishediy fair and good. Permit me, Sir, here to observe, 
that I have had verbal assurance from several persons in 
Hingham, who must be supposed to be most intimately 
acquainted with Mr. Richardson, that since his residence 
in that place, his disposition for mildness and his conduct 
for prudence, have been peculiarly eminent. 

These testimonials, Sir, in favor of Mr. Richard.oh 



52 

as a literary, fair, moral and religious character, are cer- 
tainly very ample and direct. On the source whence 
they are derived, it is needless to comment. In gener- 
al, at least, they will be admitted to be very respectable, 
and as carrying much weight and conviction. To their 
influence the late decision of my mind and subsequent 
conduct, have, in a great measure, been owing. 

In the third place I would observe, that the narrative 
drawn up by a Committee in the opposition to Mr. Rich- 
ardson, relative^ to events which took place previous tQ, 
and at the time of his ordination, with the other docu- 
ments unfavorable to his moral character, are not attend- 
ed with such evidence and weight, in my mind, as to 
produce much conviction. The narrative, indeed, con- 
tains charges very grievous and pointed, as well against 
Mr. Richardson's adherents and the proceedings of his or- 
daining council, as against him, personally — Nor will it by 
any be questioned that it has the sanction of names of high 
respectability. But that V every charge" which those 
gentlemen " brought forward against Mr. Richardson 
was completely substantiated" or that " ample evidence 
was adduced in support of them, and that no documents, 
or evidence of any kind, were produced to the Council 
which invalidated a single fact," will not so readily be 
admitted ; nor that several other charges or imputations^ 
are entitled to unlimited credence. 

Such, Sir, is the moral constitution or organization of 
man, as to render him extremely liable to view objects, 
and especially under certain circumstances, through an 
obscure and deceptions medium ; and to give them a 
correspondent description. These remarks, Sir, I would 
by no means be understood as making with exclusive 
application to any individual, or individuals, but with 
application to that being, in whose nature " are center- 
ed such strange extremes and marvellously mixed," I 
mean the being man. From these premises I am led to 
observe, that I cannot easily persuade myself to admit 
that the adherents of Mr. Richardson accused his oppo- 
se] \s of " fabricating the charges against him," and es- 
pecially as the most important of them were known to 



53 

have originated at a distance ; nor that " Mr. Bentley 
assumed and exercised, throughout the whole discussion, 
the right of determining for the Council, on every ques- 
lion" brought before them ; nor that the requests made 
by the opposers to Mr. Richardson, to the Council, were 
" rejected with contempt /' nor that they (the opposers) 
were before a •*' tribunal, under the entire controul of Mr. 
Bentley ;" nor that c < to every allegation and evidence 
which was exhibited, he applied some artful insinua- 
tion, sneer, or contemptuous observation, intended to des- 
troy its force," &c. ; nor that the Council *' viewed the 
opposition, as well as the serious charges which were ex- 
hibited against him, (Mr. Richardson) in so contemptu- 
ous a light" as to render it # impossible to give a just re- 
presentation upon paper ;" nor that every charge which 
w r as " brought forward against Mr. Richardson, was 
completely substantiated ;" nor that " ample evidence 
was adduced in support of them," while (as the Commit- 
tee suppose) " no documents or evidence of any kind, 
were produced to the Council which invalidated a single 
fact;" nor, in finer that the charges exhibited against 
Mr. Richardson, were entirely disregarded ; nor that 
Mr. Richardson " was ordained by a partial Council, se- 
lected for party purposes and wholly under the influence 
of party considerations."* 

I presume, Sir, that I am not often suspected of enter- 
taining too favorable or exalted an opinion of human 
nature or conduct ; yet, although at the hazard of in- 
curring such a suspicion, I now feel myself constrained 
to say, that I neither do, nor at present can believe, that 
the gentlemen, criminated by the above declarations and 
charges, are so devoid of the principles of integrity, and 

* It has been suggested to the writer that the above observations have been consid- 
ered as a charge against the Committee, whose names are annexed to the report under 
review, of lying, — Whether they can reasonably be construed into such a charge, the 
impartial reader will judge. If this really be the case, the writer has to regret, that 
his expressions and design were unhappily at variance : but is happy in embracing this 
opportunity to assure the respectable gentlemen of that Committee, it was far from his 
intention to insinuate that they designedly introduced into their narrative, or report, 
any false statements, or unjust representations.' — He would be understood only as saying, 
that he cannot see with their eyes, nor draw the same conclusions, which are drawn 
by them, from certain premises, 



.54 

of religion, as to conduct in the manner represented. I 
know not, Sir, but I lean too much to the favorable 
side ; but thus to err, it is generally thought, is more 
excuseable, than the error reversed. While I wish to 
avoid the insinuation that the respectable gentlemen of 
the Committee have, with design, made incorrect state- 
ments and unjust conclusions, I cannot forbear express- 
ing it as my serious belief, that the imperfection insepa- 
rable from human nature, has had some secret influence 
in biassing their minds and directing the pen. If this 
observation savour of an uncandid disposition, I pray the 
gentlemen to forgive me the wrong. 

From several statements in the narrative, it appears 
that the Committee esteem the conduct of the Council, 
relative to the non-admission of several gentlemen of 
the Clergy and others, into the Council chamber, as im- 
proper and censurable. On this subject, Sir, I do not 
feel myself competent to a satisfactory decision. 

Statements very considerably variant from those con- 
tained in the narrative, respecting that business, I have 
heard made, and from highly respectable authority. — 
As in most other cases of a similar nature, so in this, it 
is not improbable there are two extremes, somewhere 
between which, the candid mind will expect to find the 
truth. Although I have thought, and still think, that 
had I been of that Council, I should have advocated a 
different mode of procedure, in some important respects; 
yet when I reflect, that a variety of circumstances might 
have existed, of which I am ignorant, to influence, and 
to justify their conduct, I would not hastily censure or 
condemn. But admitting that the conduct of the Coun- 
cil was decidedly incorrect and censurable — Mr. Rich- 
ardson, I conceive, is not responsible for, nor ought to 
suffer on account of it. 

The statements made relative to Mr. Richardson's 
call and answer of acceptance, the design of which is to 
shew that the proceedings were attended with great ir- 
regularity, seem to be entitled to much credence, as cor- 
rect, when considered as made by gentlemen of establish- 
ed reputation for integrity ; but when I hear statements 



55 

made (as I really have heard) by gentlemen whose char- 
acter for veracity is equally established, of such a nature 
as to give a different complexion to those transactions, I 
am almost ready, in my kasfe, to exclaim with an an- 
cient monarch, " all men are liars." But a moment's 
reflection checks my impetuosity, and leads me to con- 
clude, that this clashing of representation must be owing 
to some unhappy mistake or omission, respecting circum- 
stances and events. But admitting that the business is 
chargeable with real irregularity, can it reasonably be 
considered of such magnitude, as ought to have super- 
ceded Mr. Richardson's ordination, or to operate as a 
bar to ministerial intercourse with that gentleman ? 

The charges, Sir, of a specific nature, which the Com- 
mittee produced to the Council against Mr. Richardson, 
are of such a nature, if true, I readily admit, as complete- 
ly and forever to disqualify him for the gospel ministry, 
without a public, penitent and humble confession of his 
guilt, accompanied with the most plenary evidence of 
genuine reformation. To countenance and support a 
man, by ministerial intercourse, of the character ascribed 
to Mr. Richardson in those charges, would, in my view, be 
a virtual abandonment of that defence of the gospel for 
which I am set. That Mr. Richardson, however, has given 
some occasion for those charges, will not be denied ; but 
that they are substantially true I can, at present, by na 
means admit. This has already been the public declaration 
of my conduct. But that the gentlemen of the Committee 
believe them to be true and " completely substantiated," 
will not be questioned, as they solemnly declare this to 
be their belief — But while they have full liberty to draw 
conclusions for themselves, they will grant to others the 
same liberty. 

The first charge exhibited against Mr. Richardson is 
that " of violating one of the most solemn contracts in 
social life."- — In support of this charge the Committee 
refer to " the judgment of Court" " by which he stands 
condemned ;" to the testimony of Rev. Mr. Barton of 
Fitcliburg, and to two letters written to Mr. Richardson 
by Miss Robinson. However, this evidence, in theop'nv 



o'6 

ion of the Committee, is- u so explicit and conclusive that 
it could be resisted by nothing but the most hardened 
prejudice and determined blindness ; it is, in the view 
of others, far from being plenary and convictive. 

The decision of a Court of justice,- and particularly of 
a Court of C. P., is not to be considered as infallibly cor- 
rect. And that in the ease, now under review, it is in- 
correct and injurious, I am led to believe partly from 
the declaration of Mr. S. Dana, counsel for Mr. Rich- 
ardson, that " the transaction does not, in his opinion, 
implicate Mr. Richardson's moral character, nor would it, 
in his mind, be any objection to him as a religious in- 
structor" ; and partly from such documents, as I know 
not that I have liberty, at present, to mention in relation 
to their source, as explicitly and solemnly declare, that 
Mr. Richardson never made any promise of marriage to 
Miss Robinson ; but on the contrary, that for a consider- 
able time before their connection was broken off, he ex- 
pressly and frankly observed to her, that he considered 
neither party as under obligation to the other, to enter 
into a more intimate connection than then existed be- 
tween them j and that either party should be considered 
at liberty, at any time, to discontinue that connection. 

The testimony of Mr. Barton I have heard read— 
which, to the best of my recollection amounts to this only, 
that on remonstrating to Mr. Richardson on the impro- 
priety of paying the attention, which he did, to the 
Lady in question, while his object was to obtain a pub- 
lic education, he replied, that he had gone too far to re- 
cede. If this statement be correct does it unquestiona- 
bly amount to a promise of marriage ? Is it, Sir, un- 
natural to believe, that his juvenile fondness for the com- 
pany of the young Lady, suggested the declaration as 
a pretext for continuing' his visits ? This, in a mere youth, 
though not to be justified, is not to be considered as a 
mortal crime. Although this is but a surmise, yet it 
comes within the limits of probability. The two letters 
of Miss Robinson I have also heard read. — In the one, I 
have no recollection that a promise of marriage, on the 
part of Mr. Richardson, is suggested. In the other, it 



57 

Is true, she charges him with having made and violated 
such a promise ; but that want of delicacy and decency ; 
and the appearance of a total destitution of those tender 
sensibilities inspirsed by real affection, which the style 
of the letter indicates, will hardly justify the belief, that 
she ever would, or ought to have accepted a promise of 
marriage, had it ever been made by the party accused. 
The declaration, however, relative to a promise of mar- 
riage, is possitively and. solemnly denied. I have been 
very credibly informed that Mr. Richardson does not ad- 
mit that he ever received, the letter containing if. When 
testimony, Sir, stands opposed to testimony, what is to 
be believed with relation to the case in question ? While 
lam persuaded that the testimony for, is equally strong 
as against, an accused party, I cannot give much weight 
to the testimony of the accuser. 

The second charge, that Mr. Richardson " had been 
guilty of base ingratitude, and created much disturbance, 
by divulging and misrepresenting a confidential com- 
munication made to him at his request, by one who had 
patronized him, &c." appears, from the narrative of the 
committee, to have been supported by no evidence. — - 
" Dr. Morse's evidence being necessary to prove the truth 
of the second accusation, and he not having arrived, it 
was accordingly postponed." A Mr. Bridge, however, 
is said to have made the following communication to the 
Council — That some conversation having taken place be- 
tween him and Mr. Richardson on a certain occasion, Mr. 
Richardson was led " to say, apparently without any mali- 
cious intention, and rather inadvertently, that he knew 
certain persons in Chdrlestown, not perfectly friendly to 
Mr. Bridge. And on his asking him to what he alluded, 
Mr. Richardson, after some hesitation, told him, that he 
had been advised by Dr. Morse to avoid the company of 
Mr. Bridge and others, and their families, and to seek 
that of some other persons, whom he named ; that Mr. 
Richardson then asked Mr. Bridge in presence of the 
Council, if Dr. Morse had not made some concessions to 
him ;" and that u Mr. Bridge wished to be excused from 
answering any such questions." " The committee cjr- 
H 



53 

ceiving this to be an ex-parte and inconclusive evidence- 
&c." Why then do the committee say, that " they be- 
lieve every charge which they brought forward against 
Mr. Richardson was completely substantiated, as ample 
evidence was adduced in support of them ?" Not only, 
sir, does this charge appear altogether unsupported ; but 
I am satisfied, for myself, from evidence which I consid- 
er as entitled to no inconsiderable credit, that the most 
material parts of the charge are entirely unsupportable. 

The third charge produced against Mr. Richardson is, 
" that he had avowed a principle inconsistent w T ith the 
peace and happiness of civil society ; viz. that if, even 
in a confidential manner, an opinion were given in his 
presence unfavorable to an absent person, he always con- 
sidered himself at liberty to divulge it." This charge, 
the committee say, " w r as supported by the testimony of 
Mr. Hoar, and was not denied by Mr. Richardson." — 
But, sir, is this testimony " ample evidence^* in support 
of the charge ? does it " completely substantiate''' the 
fact ? To an ecclesiastical court it surely does not. Here 
it is, that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every 
word is established. Whether the testimony of an indi- 
vidual, would go to convict an accused person, in a court 
of justice, is left to the decision of civilians. But, sir, 
were this charge to be admitted as literally true and 
completely substantiated, does it certainly follow that 
Mr. Richardson has avowed a principle inconsistent with 
the peace and happiness of civil society ? May there not 
many cases of confidential communication occur, when 
we shall not only be justified in divulging them ; but 
when, to divulge them, becomes our indispensable duty ? 
Had the Aid of Gen. Arnold, in confidence, related to 
Major Rice the treacherous design of his Gen. would 
Major Rice have scrupled to divulge it ? Would it not 
have been his indispensable duty to do this ? when 
it is considered that so many cases of a similar nature 
may occur, I should, independent of other considera- 
tion-, be likely to consider the principle now under re- 
view, (admitting Mr. Richardson to have avowed it,) to 
have been restricted by him., at least mentally, to such, 



59 

or similar cases. And this, sir, is the extent of what I 
believe relative to the subject. Perhaps I should not 
have decided thus favorably on the side of Mr. Rich- 
ardson, were it not that evidence has been exhibited to 
my mind, which I consider possessing, at least, as much 
weight to prove that the charge, as to its spirit and de- 
sign, is essentially incorrect, as the evidence of Mr. 
Hoar, to confirm it. 

The fourth charge produced against Mr. Richardson 
is, " that independently of the foregoing instances, he 
had been guilty of deception, prevarication and false- 
hood." In support of this charge, the committee state, 
that a number of circumstances were mentioned, and 
that Mr. Richardson had made different statements from 
those made by Mr. Adams of Charlestown, relative to Mr. 
Richardson's leaving his house, &c. What the circum- 
stances alluded to, as having been mentioned, were, are 
not stated ; but as the committee admit them to be of a 
secondary nature, in saying that the other instance pro- 
duced, was of the " most striking nature" it is presum- 
able that they were not very important. Eut what, sir 3 
does this other " instance" amount to, but simply this, 
Mr. Richardson says one thing and Mr. Adams another, 
Does it go, " completely" to substantiate the charge a- 
gainst Mr. Richardson ? does it amount to " ample evi- 
dence" in support of it ? Were it admitted that Mr. A- 
dam's evidence possesses more credibility than Mr. Rich 
ardson's, still I must consider the evidence far from be- 
ing complete and ample, to conviction ; and it is with 
no small satisfaction, sir, that I neither have the disposi- 
tion nor belief, that the different and clashing represen- 
tations of the gentlemen, should be attributed to either 
of them, as originating from a design to deceive, preva- 
ricate and utter falsehood. 

The fifth charge against Mr. Richardson, " that be 
had by his improper speeches and conduct manifested 
an unguarded, petulant and quarrelsome disposition," is 
supported by no specific testimony stated by the com- 
mittee. Although they may satisfy their own minds by 
saying, that " an affray which took place between Mr 



60 

Richardson and a gentleman in Chart est own, and seve* 
ral other facts were adduced in support of the fifth 
charge," their candor, it is presumed, will not allow 
them to censure others, whose minds are not so easily 
satisfied. If it were the design of the committee to state 
the evidence produced in support of the charges brought 
against Mr. Richardson, as I conceive it to have been, 
the evidence in support of the charge, now under con- 
sideration, must certainly appear not only inconclusive, 
but as essentially defective, and even problematical as 
to its existence. With respect to the " assertion" of Mr. 
Adams of Acton, that Mr. Richardson had said some- 
thing to this effect, that " he had quitted preaching be- 
cause he despised the clergy and the profession, &c." I 
would observe, that were I convinced it were true, I 
should esteem Mr. RicHARDSON as utterly unworthy to 
preach the gospel, and should hold myself under the 
most sacred obligation to treat him accordingly — until 
lie should give me the best evidence of deep repentance 
and thorough reformation of heart and life. But, sir, I 
cannot believe the assertion to be true. In saying this, 
however, I would by no means be understood to charge 
Mr. Adams with a design to misrepresent or utter false- 
hood. From investigation of this subject, I am led to 
believe that Mr. Adams unhappily labored under a great 
mistake both with respect to Mr. Richardson's expres- 
sions and design. 

The sixth and last charge produced against Mr. Rich- 
ardson is, " that he had by his acceptance and residence 
here (Hingham) in an irregular and unprecedented man- 
ner, made himself an instrument to destroy the peace of 
this Parish, and the happiness of individuals ; and al- 
though these consequences were long since well known 
to him, he has manifested a determination still to remain 
here." In relation to this charge, the Committee observe 
" that it was considered selfevident and needed no proof." 
What, Sir, did they consider as selfevident ? that Mr. 
Richardson's acceptance of a call to settle in the town of 
liam, and his residence in that town were irregular 
and unprecedented ? bid this " need no proof?" Why 



61 

then do the committee say, that they believe " every 
charge which they brought forward against Mr. Rich- 
ardson was completely substantiated* as ample evidence 
was adduced in support of them ? It is an unhappiness, 
sir, that either from the imperfection of language, 
or from other considerations, statements should be 
made of an unintelligible, and seemingly irreconcil- 
able nature. Whether Mr. Richardson is justly charge- 
able with the crime of destroying the peace of the 
North Parish in Hiiigham, and the happiness of individu- 
als, I presume not peremptorily to decide. If innocent 
of the charges brought against him, it is unreasonable to 
ascribe to him those evils ; but if the charges have not 
been supported, is it reasonable to judge and treat him 
as criminal ? What are my general views and belief, 
with respect to the subject you cannot but perceive. — 
Having endeavored candidly to examine and impartial- 
ly to state the substance of the documents to which I 
have had access, relative to the proceedings of the late 
Council in Hingham, Mr. Richardson's character, &c. — 
I beg leave to observe, that although I am far from be- 
lieving Mr. Richardson to be an Israelite free from all 
guile, and although I am not convinced that the conduct 
of the Council was in all respects correct and justifiable, 
yet, that it is my deliberate judgment and serious belief 
that he is an amiable, worthy and good man ; and, that 
there was nothing in the conduct of the Council suffi- 
cient to furnish an objection to ministerial intercourse 
with that gentleman. To this judgment and belief, sir, 
my late exchange of professional services with Mr. Rich- 
ardson, was owing. 

Whether I have formed correct opinions, or whether 
my conduct has been discreet and judicious, I make no 
peremptory decision. I would only say, that I have en- 
deavored sincerely to ascertain what is truth ? what is du- 
ty ? and to act accordingly. If I have judged and conduct- 
ed wrong, my aberrations, I hope, will be viewed with an 
eye of christian candor. And I now pledge myself, that 
on conviction of any important error, I will make suita- 
ble concession, and that should I hereafter find evidence 



62 

to convince me that Mr. Richardson is justly chargeable 
with the crimes alledged against him, I shall feel myself 
under indispensable obligation to withhold from him all 
ministerial intercourse and communion, until he shall 
make christian satisfaction for his conduct. I wish you, 
sir, not to consider me as standing forth a champion in 
the cause of Mr. Richardson and his adherents,* or as 
criminating the conduct of his opposers, but as conscien- 
tiously vindicating what I believe to be the cause of truth 
and righteousness. 

Nor would I be considered as throwing the gauntlet 
or entering the list of controversy. Such a design I se- 
riously disclaim. I however should be happy to be cor- 
rected, if in this communication,! have inadvertently been 
guilty of any material inaccuracy or error, in statement. 

Perhaps, Sir, I ought to apologize to you for putting 
your patience to so severe a trial, and for thus trespass- 
ing upon your time. I should not have done this, were 
it not for the coincidence of several circumstances which 
led me to believe, that on your part it would be expect- 
ed, and that on mine, propriety required it. 

Permit me now, Sir, sincerely to sympathize with you 
in view of the unpleasant and unhappy state of things 
in Hingham, and with you, devoutly to pray, that order 
may soon be brought out of the present confusion, light 
from the darkness, and great good out of the present 
evil — that grace, mercy and peace may abound among 
you — that you may realize, in an eminent degree, how 
good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell togeth- 
er in unity, and that, if it be for the best, the respectable 
inhabitants of the North Parish in Hingham might all 
think and speak and pursue the same things. 

With sentiments of due consideration and 
Respect, lam, Sir, with much sincerity, 
Your's, &c. J. NORTON. 

Col. Nathan Rice. 

P. S. You will be so obliging, if you please, as to 

* The writer embraces this opportunity to observe, that as no particular partiality 
for Mr. Richardson or his society, induced him to express, in manuscript, hisviews 
relative to the foregoing subjects, so, neither has he, from any such consideration con- 
sented to their appearing in print. He would also observe, should notice be taken of 



63 

communicate the aforegoing to Dr. Thaxter and Mi*. 
Henry Thaxter, who will consider themselves as ad- 
dressed, in common, with Col. Rice. 

An order of notice upon the petition of Joseph Thax- 
ter and others to be incorporated into a separate relig- 
ious society being published, the first Parish felt it their 
duty to adopt suitable measures relative to the conditions 
of the proposed separation. 

Immediately upon their calling a meeting to act upon 
the subject, they were charged by the opposers with a 
breach of confidence and inconsistency of conduct, be- 
cause they had previously voted their consent to a sepa- 
ration. The most undue advantage was taken of these 
circumstances to represent the Parish in an unfavorable 
and dishonorable light. They found themselves under 
the necessity of making preparations, at least, to vindi- 
cate their conduct against unjust aspersions. 

The first Parish did not consider that by the follow- 
ing vote they had debarred themselves the right and 
privilege of appointing a committee agreeably to the or- 
der of notice to represent the Parish and to use their in- 
fluence in the Legislature, if an actual separation took 
place, that it might be upon conditions as favorable and 
equitable as circumstances would allow. 

Here follows the vote of the Parish -verbati?n. " Vo-^ 
ted, that they (the petitioners) should be set off into a 
separate Parish or society, by such an act as the Legisla- 
ture shall think proper to grant, and as is usual in like 
incorporations." 

Now did the opposers expect they were to be left to 
make such statements to the Legislature as they were 
disposed, and thus to have an opportunity to take every 
advantage ? The first Parish were not opposed to a 
separation upon certain equitable conditions. If they 
had neglected the business, the terms might have been 
very prejudicial to the interest and welfare of the Parish. 

his letter by formal answer, or otherwise, that he will attempt no formal reply. He 
will, however, gratefully acknowledge his obligation to any one. who may be able, 
and will correct any essential errors it may contain, and will cheerfully make any con- 
cession, which truth or duty may require, 



64 

The Parish feel themselves justified upon every good 
principle, in the precautions they used to maintain their 
right and to preserve their interest. 

As the opposers were about to make their statement 
of the transactions relative to the dispute, to the General 
Court, a committee of the first Parish were instructed to 
make arrangements accordingly. They requested the 
Rev. Mr. Bentley, of Salem, who was scribe of Mr. R's 
ordaining council, to make a statement of the transac- 
tions and lay it before them. 

This statement of Rev. Mr. Bentley, we cheerfully sub* 
mit without further preliminary remarks. 

Salem, 12 fh January, 1807. 
Mr. H. Fearing, Hingham, 
Sir, 
I had seen the report of the Committee appointed to 
attend before the Ecclesiastic Council at Hingkam, for 
the ordination of Mr. Joseph Richardson, in July last ; 
but as a serious reply was not thought necessary, the copy 
was returned. But if it can be necessary to remove any 
doubts on the minds of any serious persons, I am not un- 
willing to afford you my remarks on that report. As it ap- 
peared to be rather an invective against the council, than 
any attempt at investigation, nothing but your request 
could induce a review of it. That men who refused to 
trust their papers for one night with a Council, should 
pretend, that they were not heard, were neglected, were 
treated with contempt, is indeed extraordinary. Patient- 
ly, however, let us hear them, as their own words will 
amply refute them. Let us examine the prominent arti- 
cles as they rise. Upon the organization of the Council, 
they say, of the members from Tewkesbury, one of them 
was a Father-in-law to Mr. R. Why are Churches invi- 
ted to which candidates belong, if not to invite their dear- 
est friends ? Would a friend wish to settle a friend with- 
out a prospect of usefulness or happiness. Could a man 
of sense wish a man of sense to hear such an objection ? 
And what shall we think of a report which begins in such 
a manner, complains of the common usages of our chur- 



65 

dies, and then dares to say in the conclusion, that the 
most regular proceedings are contrary to the usages of 
the New-England Churches. After such a beginning, 
we may expect to hear any thing. It then says that the 
Council heard such statements as the committee of the 
Parish, could make. Buc had no one of the Council heard 
the statements at Charles town, and therefore could they 
not get all the information they wished in the most regu- 
lar channel of information ? Could the Council proceed 
and not ask what had been done in the matter r The 
Council had no improper conferences with tiie Commit- 
tee. But says the Report, the Council considered the 
opposition as intending to pay no part of the support. 
But did not the Council hear all their evidence as a par- 
ty, and if so, how could the knowledge of facts be con- 
cealed from the Council ? They did not deny, that they 
had separated from the public worship, of themselves ; 
had administered ordinances ; held communion of Chur- 
ches, and had petitioned the Legislature, and had done 
every thing they could find in their power. But they 
go on and say, that the Council were determined not to 
admit any charges not contained in the protest. And 
then afterwards concede, that other charges were heard. 
How then could they be sure of such a determination ? 
But not to profit from their contradictions, what does a 
Fama Clamosa require in the Presbyterian Church ? Af- 
ter a regular complaint, must not at least ten days be 
granted ? We wish to know what Church denies such 
privileges ? Such is the introduction of this report. We 
are now to observe the conduct of the Council A re- 
quest was made to go to the meeting house, and the rea- 
son assigned was, that ail interested might hear. As the 
place, in which the Council was assembled, was spacious 
enough, all such interested persons were permitted to en- 
ter. The pretence, that any charges rested against thQ 
opposition, couid be known, only from an examination; 
and no such charges were brought. As the Council were 
assembled in a convenient place, to which the witnesses 
had been summoned, and to avoid all unnecessary delays 
which must have arisen, and were cleariv foreseen, tiie 



resolution of the Council may be attributed to their owe 
convictions, and not to the cause ungenerously insinua- 
ted that they were bound to the committee. In a reply, 
it will not be expected that any notice will be taken of 
those personal reflections and insinuations, which are un- 
worthy of all men who have claims to ingenuous respect. 
It was a just and necessary inquiry, whether the place 
could receive the opposers, and the Council was convinc- 
ed that they might be well accommodated. If any mea- 
sures were adopted to prevent such an accommodation, 
as was provided by the Council, such measures shouldhave 
been reported to the Council, and not have been made a 
subject of complaint, after the Council was dissolved* 
We now come to the matter of the ex-parte Council. It 
was first proposed p unite that Council with the Ordain- 
ing Council, and by neglecting to state that fact, the 
whole business is misrepresented. This proposal was ac- 
companied withsuch evident purposes of embarrassment,, 
as determined the Council to oppose it in every form. 
The Committee then went back, step by step, but no no- 
tice was taken of the ex-parte Council, after the rejection 
of the first proposal, and no orders were given upon the 
subject. They who know the nature of Ecclesiastical 
Councils, will see the wisdom of this measure. If the 
Council had not felt some emotion on the occasion, they 
must have deserved contempt. And it was not the want 
of independence and honor that gave unanimity to the 
Council in such transactions. But in the report, the 
Committee not only wished to appoint the Judges, but 
actually attempted to discourage the examination of the 
witnesses, and evidently blame tiie Council, that they 
were not allowed to put the worst construction, on the 
actions of men, without danger of contradiction. Such 
a disposition was discovered to overwhelm a young man, 
by the worst construction of all his actions, as must have 
alarmed every upright man. 

We come now to the examination. And the first re 
gards a supposed promise of marriage. The state of 
tacts appeared to be, that the opposers had sent to Dr. 
Cumi^gs, in whose house Mr. R. lived, when the affair 



67 

happened, for his judgment on the matter. And he 
wrote that as far as it was known to him it was a venial 
offence, and he said, it made no change in the disposition 
of his family towards Mr. R. : And he afterwards gave 
him an ample recommendation. The Attorney at Law r 
was sent to after the action against Mr. R. issued., 
and he wrote most expressly that nothing criminal had ap- 
peared. The method adopted to excite prejudice was 
taken from the judgment of the Court. Nothing was 
said of a possible charge against the innocent, nothing of 
the nature of many civil actions which admit a good 
general character, nothing of the influence which could 
be used after disappointment for particular ends, and no- 
thing of tire true grounds of separation. The reporters, 
therefore, chose to go on, and by producing as of great 
importance, letters from the memory of the accuser, of 
which the accused denied that he had ever seen the orii>;- 
inals, confirmed the Council that nothing could be safe- 
ly inferred against the general diameter of Mr. R. which 
had been by other documents well supported, and there- 
fore they proceeded upon the judgment already given, 
and not upon any review which might be taken, as this 
fact was before, but the civil action after, the appro* 
bation given by the Andover Association, Of what na- 
ture are recollected letters ? Did they discover his prom- 
ise of marriage ? did they exhibit any charge of an 
indelicate or criminal nature ? Satisfaction had been 
sought from the law, and the Council were unwilling to 
prevent such satisfaction as the law might decree, as a 
pecuniary punishment of his indiscretion. The letters, 
read to the Council, left no impression, which determin- 
ed them, that a separation under the circumstances they 
knew, could be considered as disqualifying him for min- 
isterial duties. 

In regard to the principle said to be justified by Mr. 
Richardson, it appeared that it was forced from him in 
a state of unavoidable irritation, and in vindication of 
his conduct. And the person, who received the confi- 
dential communication, exhibited it in circumstances 
the most perplexing to an honest mind. As the letter 



68 

in which Dr. Morse of Charlcslown, had communicated 
this affair to the people .of Hingham, could not be ob- 
tained, the Council was obliged to rely upon the testi- 
mony of Mr. Bridge to, whom Mr. R. had trusted the 
communication. 

In regard to the fourth article, as Mr. Adams had giv- 
en a testimony that in his family Mr. R's conduct had 
been unquestionably good — should Mr. R. have repre- 
sented the intentions of other persons more friendly to 
him, than Mr. Adams thought he had declared them to 
be, yet as one of the persons respecting whom the con- 
versation arose, did in person testify before the Council 
to the friendly conduct of Mr. R. before the dispute with 
Dr. Morse, Mr. R. was thought to be amply vindicated 
from a-cha?ge of designed misrepresentation. As to the 
new charge of a contemptuous opinion of his profession, 
it was denied by Mr. R. and which he had not heard be- 
fore, and from a person Mr. R. did not recollect, and it 
could not be a specific charge, from one man against ge- 
neral character as testified by Deacon Goodwin, and the 
gentlemen of Chariest ow?u The sixth charge may a- 
rise against every candidate in towns in which divisions 
arise, and against many attempts to propagate christian- 
ty. As Mr. R's character had been violently attacked 
in Hingliqm, his presence was necessary to repel it. He 
could not retreat. To retreat was death. 

As the reporters then declared repeatedly they had 
nothing more to say, and Dr. Morse had not arrived, the 
Council proceeded in their duty. It must then be con- 
sidered as a strange misrepresentation, that the reporters 
said they had more observations to make, and that men 
who withdrew with their papers, believed they were to 
have another hearing, when they had nothing to say. — 
It is true that the Council received repeated notices, as 
the report says, but as they were without dates or signa- 
tures, they were not entitled to regard. To say thepapers 
were not called for, when they had been asked for and 
had been refused, and when an inquiry had been made 
whether some of them might not have fallen into the 
bands of the Council ; is to prove confusion at least in 



69 

the minds of those who wrote the report. As to Dr. 
Morse's arrival after these transactions, when he had 
been seasonably notified, and when a convention of mi- 
nisters, at great expense, had met in Charlestown on the 
subject, without any attempt to satisfy them on his part- 
it can have no weight with any man who considers the 
nature of the Council, and that the Council did not ob- 
tain the letter which had been sent to Hinghanh and it is 
not to be imagined that the persons who came with him 
were evidences of what Dr. Morse communicated to Mr. 
R. alone. What Dr. Morse had said the Council did 
not hear, and the Moderator had no information which 
he thought himself engaged to communicate. That mi- 
nisters applied for admission from the neighborhood, in- 
dependently of the ex-parte Council, was not made 
known to the Council. 

The report concludes with remarks which betray the 
passions with which it was written. What the Council 
might feel cannot be known by other men, but the Coun- 
cil were unanimously of opinion that the opposers had 
supported no charge whatever, and the Council were 
possessed of such documents, which appeared upon the 
examination as convinced them that the most unfriend- 
ly constructions had been put upon Mr. R's. actions. — 
They gave a result accordingly, which the Moderator 
modestly, suitably, and sufficiently announced, and the 
Council proceeded to the ordination in consistency with 
their just duty, believing that very few men can produce 
such testimonies of their general good behavior, and 
good habits, and that the opposition had been guided by 
violent prejudices, and under the influence of the most 
injurious misrepresentations. 

In the lives of few men do so many circumstances com- 
bine to preserve purity of character, as in tbe life of Mr. 
R. Few men are found able to produce such an ample 
testimony of the invariable goodness of their lives. From 
the friends of his youth, and a minister entitled to the 
highest honors, we have the testimony of his pure man- 
ners, and just deportment from his early days. From 
his College, we have the testimony of the Professor of 



70 *^ 

Divinity, of the Church, of the intimate companion 
of his studies and a candidate in another Communion. 
After he received the honors of his College, he behaved 
as a schoolmaster with great approbation, and entered 
toe family of his minister as a student in divinity. From 
tins minister, who by his distinguished reputation, and 
loas acquaintance with men is best qualified to judge of 
men, he hid a generous recommendation to the Trus- 
tees of the Academy at Charles town. Here his vexa- 
tions begin, and here the charges against him end ; for 
lie nas neither betrayed the want of the social or chris- 
tian w rues at Hingham, or the want of qualifications for 
the public oi' private duties of a christian minister. At 
Char I est oiv n he was introduced to Dr. Morse, who en- 
deavored to initiate a young man unexperienced in the 
ways of the world, into all the secrets of his own private 
friendships. Mr. R. gave himself up to the guidance of 
this man, till he found the inconsistency of these rules 
and his duty. Perplexed with the apparent folly of his 
conduct, and of the partial affections he was obliged to 
betray, while his friends could see no cause for them, he 
at length unguardedly disclosed the state of his mind to 
an injured man, who felt all the resentment which be- 
longed to the injury, and ,yet yielded to all the reconcil- 
iation which he owed to penitence and submission. Not 
willing to share the folly and the punishment, a godly 
zeal, which is often cruel, directed letters to Hingham, 
and from these the divisions in Hi/zgham, have been vio- 
lent. Suspicion when once excited, and prejudice once 
alarmed, and anger when roused can associate guilt to 
all ihe actions of men. It was soon found that Mr. R. 
had in early life formed attachments, which he did not 
chuse to consummate in marriage, and that a resentment 
which had long slept, had raised a prosecution against 
him. This was an offence, winch, while it admits all 
the extenuations and pity of friends, can admit all the 
virulence, and cruelty of enemies. It was made a crime, 
and then added to the list of his accusations. Pursued 
by a powerful enemy, and situated to be wounded by 
every shaft, he was daily obliged to vindicate hansel £ 



and in the heat of resentment, and from the violence of 
detraction, he was unable to avoid such language in his 
justification, as might lay him open to fresh wounds.— 
He could not escape all the worst constructions of his 
Intentions. The vindication of an act, not of his choice, 
but his necessity, was construed into a general princi- 
ple, and then represented as unfriendly to all social con- 
fidence. But when removed from this vortex, his mo- 
tions were not unworthy of thathighcharacter,theTrustees 
of the Academy, and the Selectmen of Charlestow?i 
gave him. At Hi/?gkamhe behaved with prudence as a 
friend, with affection as a minister, and in the pulpit he 
had his full share of approbation, and displayed the tal- 
ents which supported the best hopes of his future useful- 
ness. Such is indeed the substance of all that has ap- 
peared upon the most careful examination, and upon a 
candid review of all the charges ailed ged against him. 
To me, till his affairs at Hingham made him known, he 
was an entire stranger. Perhaps had not the force of 
popular names been employed against him, and had not 
the venerable age of a good man been abused to sancti- 
fy by the authority of great past services, the indiscre- 
tion of friends, the objections might have perished at 
their birth, and the history of their existence have been 
lost forever. Mr. R. and his friends will continue to re- 
collect that passion and prejudice are powerful enemies, 
with which they have to contend, especially when these 
enemies have the resources of wealth and the assistance 
of antient associations. They will also remember that 
their vigilance and their duty arise out of their perils, 
and that the glory of victory, is from the greatness of the 
courage and wisdom displayed in it. May christian mo- 
tives strengthen you, and christian hopes encourage you. 
While you are firm to the truth, God will protect you. 
Yours in all sincerity, 

WILLIAM BENTLEY. 
Agreeably to the order of notice upon the petition 
of Joseph Thaxter and others a committee from th< 
Parish met the agents of the petitioners before the Court's 
Committee. 



n 

The Court's Committee objected against going into 
the merits of the dispute and reported leave to the peti- 
tioners to bring in a bill. 

The Committee from the first Parish and the agents 
of the petitioners agreed in making out a bill, which 
was enacted by the General Court. 

As there have been numerous misrepresentations cir- 
culated abroad, prejudicial to the honour of the first 
Parish, we feel it our duty to lay before the public a 
comparative view of the number and property of the 
parties. 

At the time of the ordination of Mr. Richardson, the 
Parish Committee laid the following estimate before the 
Council. 

Families, 241 in favour of the settlement of Mr. 
Richardson and 70 opposed. The proportion of taxes 
for the support of the Minister was as 289 dollars paid 
by his opposers, to 803, paid by the whole Parish.* 

The number of souls was as 1019, to 327 against 
him. The number of rateable polls was as 223f friends 
to 83 opposers. This statement was made as nearly 
correct as possible. 

The number of petitioners incorporated into a new 
society was 98. Of this number 22 were single women. 
Of the 76 male petitioners 14 were single. 

We have been more particular and minute in this last 
statement, that false reports might be completely detect- 
ed. 

The petitioners having built a Meeting-house and be- 
ing incorporated, proceeded to make their arrangements 
for an Ordination. Now let the reader observe the pro- 
ceedings of these gentlemen, who a little time since ob- 
jected to the ordination of Mr. Richardson, " because 
they considered the manner of his call and his accept- 
ance irregular and unprecedented."! 

The Church of the First Parish had lent a number of 

* This statement is not made for the sake of boasting, but that people may know, 
•whether they have been deceived and how far they have been deceived in respect to^ 
numbers and property. 

+ At the present time, May 1807, the number of polls in the first Parish is 283- 

I Observe the opposers' report. 



m 

silver cups to those who had separated themselves from 
the Church, and had suffered other property of the 
Church to remain in their hands, with the assurance 
they would give them up when called for. But it being 
insinuated that they intended to retain the property in 
their possession, a few days previous to the contemplat- 
ed ordination, a committee of the Church called upon 
those who held the property to give it up, but they re- 
fused, intimating that they intended to be recognized as 
the First Church in Hingham, and to hold the property 
as their right. 

Their Council beins: convened, the following remon- 
strance was sent them by the Church* 

To the Reverend and respected Moderator of the Coun- 
cil, convened at the Derby Academy. 

Whereas the first Church in Hingkam hold by lawful 
right and title certain property, consisting of silver and 
other vessels, of furniture, land, a note of hand and oth- 
er papers or records : And whereas a part of said ves- 
sels and furniture being in the hands of those who had 
separated from the Church, v/hen called for by the 
Church committee, was delivered up ; And whereas by 
order of said Church their committee called on Monday 
last for the remainder of their property, which was re- 
fused, partly under this pretext, that those Church-mem- 
bers who have separated themselves from the said Church 
and Parish intend to be recognized as holding the right 
and title of the said first Church, and partly under this 
pretext, that a vote was passed in the Church to divide 
the property : 

Therefore, we the undersigners, a committee in be- 
half of the said first Church, duly appointed, are com- 
pelled in vindication of the right and title of said Church, 
hereby to remonstrate against the members of the Church 
who belong to the third Congregational Society being 
recognized as the first Church in Hingkam, or as holding, 
in their separate capacity, any right or title, as the said 
first Church. 

We sincerely and deeply regret that w T e have any oc 

K 



u 

casion to interfere in the transactions of the said third 
Congregational society. But let it be remembered, that 
an attempt to withhold the property belonging to the said 
iirst Church, or to assume the right and title of the same, 
is the occasion which imperiously calls us to make this 
remonstrance. 

Their first pretext for withholding the Church proper- 
ty, which is, that they have a claim to the right and title 
of the first Church, for the following reasons, cannot be 
maintained. 

1. Those church-members who separated themselves 
from the first, or North Parish, never, at any regular 
meeting, constituted a majority in the church. 

2. The first Church have uniformly adhered to the 
first Parish, and, on a thorough investigation, (both par- 
ties in the church being heard by a regular ordaining 
council) in July last, was recognized as in regular stand- 
ing and in fellowship with the churches. 

The other pretext for withholding the church property, 
is, That a vote was passed in the church to divide the 
property. 

But we assert and pledge ourselves to prove to the sat- 
isfaction of any impartial tribunal, that no vote of separ- 
ation or vote authorizing a division of the church prop- 
erty ever was passed at any regular meeting of the 
church. 

The plain statement of facts is this. The first attempt 
of those who separated from the church to carry any 
point contrary to the church and Parish, was on the 9th 
day of January, 1806 ; when they ' voted to non-concur 
the doings of the Parish and to protest against the same.' 

.But the truth is, which we do support, that on the said 
°!h of January, 1806, no regular Church meeting was 
fiolden;\ No object of a church-meeting was generally 

+ The following document proves there was no non-concurrence of the Church ever 
voted, as stated by the opposers. This document furnishes the proof referred to in the 
33d page. 3d note from the bottom. 

Hingham, December 23, 1806. 

Whereas a certain communication has been made, purporting a statement of the pro- 
ceedings of the hist Church in Hingham, on the 9th dsy of January, 1806 : Also pur- 
porting a i ; on--c<;ncurrence of the Church with the Parish in calling Mr. Joseph Rich- 
ardson to settle as their minister, and a protest against the proceedings ot the Parish : 



70 

known. No church meeting was warned, at the usual 
time* or in the usual manner. No church meeting was 
holden at -the usual place. 

While there is a pretence that a meeting of the church 
was holden on the said 9th of January 1806, in the Der- 
by Academy, the statement of the proceedings of that. 
meeting shews there w r ere but twenty-one members pre- 
sent, whereas there were forty-six male members at that 
time resident in the Parish. Of that number (twenty- 
one) John Beal, a member of the church at Cokassef 
w r as one, whose relation never was removed to the first 
church in Hingham. 

Another of that number was a negro-servant of Gen. 
Lincoln, who never had a legal inhabitancy in the Town 
or paid any taxes.f 

On the 22d of March, 1806, a regular meeting of the 
church was holden, when it was voted that tiie Sacra- 
ment should be administered as usual. 

But the Deacons, although expressly requested, re- 
fused to make the usual preparations and with others 
withdrew, without the consent of the church, and held 
communion, immediately, in the Derby Academy. 

When the church held a meeting on the 19th of June. 
1806, for. the purpose of making arrangements for an 
ordination, those who had separated themselves appear- 
ed and acted in opposition, but the votes were carried, 
24 to 13. 

We the subscribers, Committee of the said first Church in Hingham, hereby disclaim 
the. whole pretence of that communication, as being by or under the authority of said 
Church ; and we do hereby certify that no meeting of the first Church in Hingham wd$ 
holden on the said 9th day of January, for the following reasons, viz. 

1. That no ChurGh meeting was \yarned in any usual manner. 

2. That some had no notice of the pretended meeting. 

3. That no purpose or occasion of a Church meeting was known to us. - And 

4. That no meeting of the Church was holden in the Meeting-house, according to 
our invariable custom. 



THOMAS FEARING, 


1 . 


JACOB BEAL, 


Committee of the 


ISAAC GUSHING, 


> ..." 


CALEB HOB ART, 


( said First - h %k. 


JOHN MARSH, 


J 



* It is the custom of the first Church in Hingham to notify their meetings on the 
sabbath. 

t Granting the negro servant of Gen. Lincoln had a right thus to give his vote in 
the Church, does it appear worthy of the character of a great and a good man in such a 
state of contention- and division in the Church, to introduce such a character in ore :? 
:o carry a point ? 



76 

Now if they constituted a majority in the church, 
wherein can it be made to appear, when, if any ques- 
tion, touching the division in the church, were agitated, 
they were always found in the minority ? 

And if a vote of separation, or to divide the proper- 
ty of the church, had ever been passed, how came those 
who were separated from the church to be acting in the 
church on the said 19th of June ? 

We forbear to enlarge, but pledge ourselves to sub- 
stantiate what is herein asserted to be fact, and to make 
it appear to a mutual council or an ecclesiastical refer- 
ence, before whom we ever have been, and now are, 
ready and willing to appear to settle any matters of dis- 
pute relating to the church, 

We now assert our claim to the full right and title of 
the first church in Hingham and to all the property of the 
same ; and remonstrate against the claim of any persons 
to said right and title.* 

THOMAS FEARING, 

JACOB BEAL, 

ISAAC GUSHING, 

CALEB HOBART, } first Church in 

JOHN MARSH, 

SETH LINCOLN, 

JOTH'AM LINCOLN, 
Hingham, June 16, 1807. 

Now it appears those members, who separated from 
the Church without consent, have proceeded to establish 
themselves as a Church, and to procure the ordination of 
a minister. By what authority are the members of a 
Church separated without the consent or even a hearing 
of that body ? Is an ordaining Council vested with the 
power to separate and establish them ? Are not the mem~ 
burs of a Church to be governed by that body as Church 
members, till their relation be removed by the consent 
of the Church or regularly dissolved ? 

According to the platform of discipline of the New- 
England Churches, those who separated from the First 
Church, are guilty of conduct " unlawful and sinful." — « 

J The property has since been delivered up to tic first Church. 



In behalf of the 



Hingham. 



77 

We refer the reader to the 5th section of the 13th chap* 
ter of the platform, which is as follows : " To separate 
from a Church, either out of contempt of their holy fel- 
lowship, or out of covetousness, or for greater enlarge- 
ments, with just grief to the Church ; out of schism, or 
want of love, and out of a spirit of contention, in res- 
pect of some unkindness, or some evil only conceived, 
or indeed in the Church, which might and should be tol- 
erated and held with a spirit of meekness, and of which 
evil the Church is not yet convinced, (though perhaps 
himself be) nor admonished for these or the like reasons 
to withdraw from public communion in word, or seals, 
or censures, is unlawful and sinful*." 

Now, how members of a Church, separating them- 
selves in the manner those did, who belong to the Third 
Congregational Society, could, without the voice or con- 
sent of the First Church, be formed into a separate 
Church in regular standing, is to us a mystery ! 

Perhaps the venerable Council who sanctioned this 
practice, can solve the difficulty. 

If that Council had looked into the merits of the dis- 
pute by hearing both parties, and had found those who 
had separated themselves to be so far aggrieved, as to 
justify their conduct, then the council might have re- 
dressed their wrongs by establishing them as a separate 
Church. But this could not be done without giving the 
first church, from whom they separated, an opportunity to 
be heard. However, church or no church, it seems the 
opposers did not now trouble themselves concerning 
things " irregular and unprecedented." 

It has been with a degree of reluctance that we have 
brought all these things to light, because it tends to keep 
contention alive. 

But we have suffered wrong upon wrong, till a sense 
,of duty has compelled us to correct the misrepresenta- 
' tions, which are gone abroad. 

* The opposers may pretend, in justification of their conduct, that the vote of sepa- 
ration by the Parish set them at liberty from the Church. But the latter is an ecclesias- 
tical, and the former a civil body or body politic. Will any one of common sense 
pretend that a body politic has power or a right to dissolve the relation of Church 
members ? Even the General Court have nothing; to do in forming or dissolving the 
gelation of Church-membership. 



78 

We have endeavored to give a fair and correct state- 
ment of the principal transactions, which we have passed 
in review, and to detect the most material errors which 
have been propagated. 

Many less important affairs have occurred, such as 
going to the neighboring towns to prevent or interrupt 
ministerial intercourse between their ministers and the 
minister of the First Parish in Hingham, and conveying 
defamatory papers to prejudice the minds of the public. 

But, blushing for the depravity of human nature, we 
would suppress our emotions and forbear to enumerate 
the whole list of crimes ! 

Should any important point in this publication, be dis- 
puted, we pledge ourselves to prove it. 

We ask only the lenity of candor for any inadverten- 
cy. As to documents that may be in the hands of the 
opposers, we should have been happy to publish them, 
had they been in our possession. The favor we could 
never obtain. 

Should the occasion require we are ready, unpleasant 
as the business is, to enter into a more minute and tho- 
rough investigation of all the transactions and circum- 
stances relating to the late controversy in Hingham. 

Had we descended to a more minute detail of affairs, 
though we might have incurred a charge of censorious- 
ness, it still would not, we believe, have appeared in the 
least to the disadvantage of our cause. 

We have been compelled, as we believe in justice to 
ourselves, to expose a number of facts, by no means re- 
flecting much honor upon certain characters, which 
might otherwise have forever rested in oblivion. 

A narrative of all the circumstances and minutest 
transactions, relating to this controversy, would have 
swelled this statement into a large volume. 

We appeal with respectful deference to the honest 
judgment of the candid, impartial reader to decide, whe- 
ther the vindication we professed, be not ample and con- 
clusive. 

We have furnished the reader all the best authenticat- 
ed documents favorable to the cause of our opponents, 
which we could obtain. 



79 

This truth must be admitted that " belief' is not al- 
ways founded upon evidence. In order to ascertain what 
is truth, whatever is offered as evidence, should be cri- 
tically examined and impartially weighed. The bare 
assertions of interested persons, even of the highest rep- 
utation, may not be substantially true. 

But must not the fair testimony of disinterested char- 
acters of the highest reputation contained in this vindi- 
cation impress strong conviction upon every unprejudi- 
ced mind ? 

Can the bitter invectives and disguised insinuations of 
a few ill designing persons, whose characters are very 
little known* though known to be violent partizans in 
politics, none of whom pretend ever to have had but 
slight acquaintance with Mr. Richardson, and that only 
during a few weeks or months, can such invectives and 
insinuations be entitled to much weight ? 

Judge, candid reader, whether the surmises and insin- 
uations of such characters are to be credited in opposition 
to the testimony of the venerable Dr. Cumings of Billeri- 
ca, whosehigh reputation is acknowledged by all parties f 

Are they to be credited in opposition to the testimony 
of Rev. Dr. Smith, Pastor of the Church of which he 
was a member, and to the testimony of the Trustees of 
the schools and the selectmen of Ckarlestown^ who were 
witnesses of the conversation and deportment of Mr. 
Richardson from the time he left Billerica till he was 
called to settle in Hingham f 

But if the contrary testimonials in the hands ■ of the 
opposers be substantially true, why have they been so 
long kept under a cloak ? Why were not the letters 
themselves circulated and not the charges which were 
formed out of them ? Truth undisguised is the only hon- 
orable vindication of a good and just cause. 

We have shewn that our opposers were favored with 
an opportunity to lay all their evidence before an or- 
daining Council, and that they occupied a great part of 
two days in adducing what they called their evidence, 
and in commenting upon it, and that the Council were, 
after hearing the whole, unanimous in their result and 
proceeded to the ordination. 



80 

Will any candid, ingenuous reader place more confi- 
dence in the statement of a party in the dispute in King- 
ham, than in the result of a regular ordaining Council, all 
of whom, (eight in number) to say the least, are men of 
honest report, and several of whom stand high in public 
esteem ? We ask no one implicitly to confide in our word 
or bare assertion ; we only ask a mature consideration 
of the testimony of others, and such assertions as may 
foe found well supported, 

The preceding vindication is respectfully submitted to 
the candid judgment of the public, by the subscribers. 

JACOB BEAL, Jacob Leavitt, "^ 

Hawkes Fearing, | Committees of the first 



ISAAC GUSHING, 
TH. FEARING, 
JOSEPH BASSET 



Laban Hersey, ( Church and Parish in Hivg- 

Solomon Jones, J ham. chosen to rtcdze and 

SETH LINCOLN, | Charles Lincoln, )>attend the Ordaining Council 

CALEB HOBAJ8T, jj Jedediah Lincoln, [ and to act in behalf of the 

Solomon Lincoln, \ said first Church and Parr 

Duncan M'B. Thaxter \ isle. 

James Stephenson, J 



JOTHAM LINCOLN. 



OMISSIONS. 

Page 17, line 1st. after " his ordination" read the following note : 
Lt may be said by the opposers that it was proposed on their part not to oppose 
Mr. R's ordination, on condition that his friends would sign an obligation not to use 
any influence to prevent their being set off as a separate Parish or Society. The reas- 
ons of Mr. R's friends for not complying with that condition, were, 

1. Because such an obligation might have been construed into an excuse for the op- 
posers not appearing to support their charges. 

2. Because Mr. R's friends might by such a measure have incurred this reflection, 
that they did it to screen Mr. R's character from a thorough investigation. And 

3. Because such a mets ire would have been a relinquishment of the right of the 
First Parish to oppose the incorporation of the opposers as a poll Parish, but the First 
Parish had not, by their vote, deprived themselves of the privilege of using their in- 
fluence to obtain an incorporation uponterms the most favorable to the First Parish. 

Page 44., line iSth, where if says, ll without aparallel," the following note should have be en 
introduced. The opposers' Committee undoubtedly state the truth, ifthe conduct of their 
own party be taken into an account of the'transaction. The reader must discover what 
regard they pay to truth and decency, and by what sort of religion they were influenced 
in their conduct, by their closing remarks. We would forbear thus to express our 
indignation, but the attack upon the Council and Parish in those concluding remarks 
demands that the injured should no longer suffer. 



fTNIS. 



Y 



7 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: April 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724)779-2111 






5> ')j^:;>30J?>'Z»> : 



i>--:>y>>>:3R>- 









so 









_> ->j^^? -P ~T 



^>2g> -52* > 












5JT> 



SuaM3iSiS^* 






^J> 



























1 o> >m 

S2>":3>™> ^>>2 

m>z$> IS :-.ar ' 









i> Ji 












~0 v » ' 






>.7 















CSJO I»> »^ - 


















^ 



- » 






>3 > >^3 ^>I> > 



V° " 5 > ?>' 

mmmm 



